Who will accept a DB to SIPP transfer from "insistent client"

Dale72

Antysam said:

So the abridged advice is not a lot of use really if you need the full advice to be an insistent client ? Please update if you have any positive news 🙏

That's right, the abridged advice is only designed for people that actually want advice and is a way of finding out that a transfer (in the IFAs opinion) is not best for them, without them having to pay the cost of full advice. Personally, I've chosen to take full advice from an FA at Hargreaves Lansdowne, as they are my existing Sipp provider. If the advice is positive, then I'll transfer into the Sipp, if it isn't then I have already spoken to AJ Bell, who say they will be happy to enact the transfer to their own Sipp free of charge.

PS. It may be the correct, but I do dislike the term 'insistent client', it sounds like a toddler jumping up and down stamping their feet, rather than someone simply being pro active in managing their own finances.

dunstonh

PS. It may be the correct, but I do dislike the term 'insistent client', it sounds like a toddler jumping up and down stamping their feet, rather than someone simply being pro active in managing their own finances.

For the majority of cases, it is an apt description.

People who do not engage in the advice process and make little effort to understand what the advice is are often the ones that go on to raise complaints later when things dont match what they thought.

[Deleted User]

dunstonh said:

PS. It may be the correct, but I do dislike the term 'insistent client', it sounds like a toddler jumping up and down stamping their feet, rather than someone simply being pro active in managing their own finances.

For the majority of cases, it is an apt description.

People who do not engage in the advice process and make little effort to understand what the advice is are often the ones that go on to raise complaints later when things dont match what they thought.

Great label imho. I revel in it. 

Because if there is one side I never want to be on, it is that of the financial services industry servants. 
The assumption from financial industry apologists that "people like you" (me 18 months ago) will be the first to complain when things go wrong says everything you need to know about the regard in which it holds you. 

I had advice from two pension transfer specialists, one said no, one said yes. In each case - and I suspect in every case - the financial adviser was deciding in his own interest. Had I accepted the recommendation of the first adviser, I would be a quarter of a million pounds worse off today. With no redress. 

trevjl

If the courts didn't make ridiculous decisions, allowing things like the PPI claims then there wouldn't be a problem. If you sign it, thats it, it is your own fault IMHO. Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your own actions.

arnoldy

Silvertabby said:

 I (as a LGPS administrator) spoke to a fair few IFAs who stated that there was 'no way that they would recommend a transfer out from a public sector DB scheme'.  

 I (as a LGPS administrator) spoke to a fair few IFAs who stated that there was 'no way that they would recommend a transfer out from a public sector DB scheme'.  

Yes there are two types of DB:  Firstly public sector ones that are usually fully index linked with no worries about the health of the "sponsoring company". Why transfer these (if allowed) apart from serious illness?

Secondly, private sector DBs are a rather different beast and should not be compared to public DB - most of them are CPI capped (NOT index linked) and rises are dependent of the financial health of the fund to provide any rises at all.  As most private DBs are closed, and the directors don't have any skin in the game there, there is little zero? incentive to spend money on it beyond the bare minimum to the detriment of their financial interests (profits/share price) and their current employees who are all on DC and don't want to fund a bunch of "privileged" old-timers. If inflation returns to historical levels most of these Private sector DBs will  sink and loose value over the years.

Albermarle

trevjl said:

If the courts didn't make ridiculous decisions, allowing things like the PPI claims then there wouldn't be a problem. If you sign it, thats it, it is your own fault IMHO. Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your own actions.

I understand your point, but I do not think that allowing rogue advisors full reign to push people into transfers that are most likely not in their best interest , is an option anymore . Not after the scandals with British Steel workers, NHS staff etc 
Hence maybe too much of a clampdown in the other direction .

Thrugelmir

trevjl said:

If the courts didn't make ridiculous decisions, allowing things like the PPI claims then there wouldn't be a problem. 

PPI was a commission driven rip-off.  Nothing to do with the courts. 

If the UK hadn't followed the litigious practices of the US. Then we wouldn't now be in a position where people believe that they have no responsibility at all for their own actions, and there's magic money trees that reimburse them if they make the wrong decision. 

Fluffybunny747

So as of this week AJ Bell are no longer accepting transfers from insistent clients.  They will only accept where the advice is positive.

Marcon

Fluffybunny747 said:

So as of this week AJ Bell are no longer accepting transfers from insistent clients.  They will only accept where the advice is positive.

So an insistent client can go the route of transferring to a stakeholder pension, which must accept all transfers from any UK registered pension scheme (if the transfer value is £30K+ advice will still be needed before the DB scheme can proceed with the transfer); and then into a SIPP of their choice, because it will by then be a simple DC to DC transfer.

dunstonh

Marcon said:

Fluffybunny747 said:

So as of this week AJ Bell are no longer accepting transfers from insistent clients.  They will only accept where the advice is positive.

So an insistent client can go the route of transferring to a stakeholder pension, which must accept all transfers from any UK registered pension scheme (if the transfer value is £30K+ advice will still be needed before the DB scheme can proceed with the transfer); and then into a SIPP of their choice, because it will by then be a simple DC to DC transfer.

Whilst a stakeholder pension does have that requirement, a number of the few remaining stakeholder pensions that still exist only retail their product via an intermediary.   So, you can eliminate those providers.
It would have to be a direct-to-consumer stakeholder pension that is done without any involvement from an intermediary (including the insurer's own salesforce).    You could probably count that on one hand.   Indeed, i just checked Defaqto and they list four stakeholder pensions as still being open for new business.  Aviva, Standard Life, Royal London and Forester Life.   Of those 4, only forester life is classed as a non-intermediary product.
It is possible there are other open stakeholder pensions available that do not provide data to defaqto.