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

Albermarle

Any recommendations for a Stakeholder Pension with no exit fees and low management charges gratefully accepted

Stakeholders have gone out of fashion and not many available . They do not have a lot of flexibility or choice and you would probably be better off in a SIPP, if you can find one that will accept an insistent client of course.
Here are links to a couple:
https://www.cavendishonline.co.uk/stakeholder-pension
https://www.standardlife.co.uk/c1/accounts-and-services/pensions/stakeholder-pension-features.page

SonOf

lewisp91 wrote: »

Any recommendations for a Stakeholder Pension with no exit fees and low management charges gratefully accepted

Stakeholder pensions are a largely an niche option nowadays as they are no longer the cheap option they once were and they didnt fit with the RDR. Most providers pulled out and today there are only a couple left.

By definition, a stakeholder pension cannot have exit charges. However, very few modern retail pensions have exit charges nowadays.

A stakeholder pension is not the answer to your problem. Whilst it must accept transfers from other registered schemes, it still has to comply with transfer rules and the providers will still insist on an IFA being involved and the transaction going through their agency.

xylophone

A stakeholder pension is not the answer to your problem. Whilst it must accept transfers from other registered schemes, it still has to comply with transfer rules and the providers will still insist on an IFA being involved and the transaction going through their agency.

The problem does not appear to be finding the pension transfer specialist?

He has already found one and it seems the PTS will not give the required statement.

https://adviser.royallondon.com/technical-central/pensions/transfers/safeguarded-benefits/

The individual must confirm to the scheme administrator they have received financial advice before the transaction can proceed. This confirmation must be provided within 3 months of the individual receiving the safeguarded benefit value from the scheme administrator.

The confirmation must take the form of a written statement from the adviser confirming all of the following:

They have provided financial advice to the individual on the proposed transaction.
They have the appropriate permissions to carry out the transaction.
The adviser's FCA registration number to carry out the transaction.
The individual's name and the name of the scheme in which they have the safeguarded benefits.

The adviser does not necessarily have to agree with the proposed transaction to provide this confirmation. They are simply confirming that they have provided advice on the proposed transaction to the individual.

If the OP cold get the statement, the ceding scheme would agree to the transfer - the OP would then need to find a provider to accept the transfer although against advice.

If a stakeholder cannot refuse a transfer in, then he would find the stakeholder, transfer in and later transfer to a SIPP?

Or find a SIPP provider willing to accept a transfer without a positive recommendation.

xylophone

The LGPS is funded but I doubt it would be offering 32x CETV.

Perhaps the BBC?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/employmentrelatedpensionsinpublicsectorfinances/2017-09-21

Public sector examples of funded pension schemes are the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) and the BBC Pension Scheme.

Marcon

SonOf wrote: »

A stakeholder pension is not the answer to your problem. Whilst it must accept transfers from other registered schemes, it still has to comply with transfer rules and the providers will still insist on an IFA being involved and the transaction going through their agency.

It's the DB ceding scheme which needs evidence that financial advice has been received, not the stakeholder pension - which must accept the transfer. OP can then transfer on to their choice of SIPP, so what the stakeholder does or doesn't offer is irrelevant. It is simply a staging post to ensure that the SIPP will accept the transfer - and as it will be DC (stakeholder) to DC (SIPP), there won't be a need for the SIPP to see any financial advice.

Why isn't that the answer?

Dox

SonOf wrote: »

A stakeholder pension is not the answer to your problem. Whilst it must accept transfers from other registered schemes, it still has to comply with transfer rules and the providers will still insist on an IFA being involved and the transaction going through their agency.

I think you'll find it is exactly the answer!

Brynsam

SonOf wrote: »

Stakeholder pensions are a largely an niche option nowadays as they are no longer the cheap option they once were and they didnt fit with the RDR. Most providers pulled out and today there are only a couple left. So what?OP only needs one, temporarily!

By definition, a stakeholder pension cannot have exit charges. However, very few modern retail pensions have exit charges nowadays. But unlike stakeholder pensions, they are not required to accept transfers

A stakeholder pension is not the answer to your problem. In what respect is it 'not the answer'?Whilst it must accept transfers from other registered schemes, it still has to comply with transfer rules and the providers will still insist on an IFA being involved and the transaction going through their agency. An IFA needs to be involved to give the advice needed to permit the DB scheme to proceed with the transfer out.

See above - hard to understand your objections.

SonOf

It's the DB ceding scheme which needs evidence that financial advice has been received, not the stakeholder pension - which must accept the transfer.

The DB pension needs the form. However, the receiving scheme will want the IFA to sign their forms the minute they find out that it is a DB transfer. Some will want it to go through the agency of that IFA.

If this can be done then it solves the problem but why is the adviser not doing this? Why does the OP have to find a provider and not the adviser?

Brynsam

SonOf wrote: »

The DB pension needs the form. However, the receiving scheme will want the IFA to sign their forms the minute they find out that it is a DB transfer. Some will want it to go through the agency of that IFA.

If this can be done then it solves the problem but why is the adviser not doing this? Why does the OP have to find a provider and not the adviser?

Not if it's a stakeholder; the transfer cannot be refused.

lewisp91

AJ Bell has confirmed they will transfer in a DB pension from an Insistent Client recommended NOT to transfer without further IFA involvement. Their charging structure is a bit of a minefield on first analysis but that wouldn't be for long though.
Fidelity, Cavendish, Xafinity, HL, ii all said NO. Thank you for useful factual advice above.