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

AlanP_2

ZingPowZing said:

AlanP_2 said:

Dale72 said:

dunstonh said:

Dale72 said:

HappyHarry said:

The advice should only be negative if it is determined that it is not in your best interest to transfer.

There is a repeated implication on these boards that an adviser will almost always give advice to retain a DB pension as it is safer for the adviser.

This is not my experience, nor of other advisers in this area that I have spoken to. You should expect a good adviser working for a fee to give you advice suited to your circumstances, not theirs.

Nonsense, and I think most on here know it.

What bit do you consider nonsense?   I cannot see anything in what HappyHarry wrote that could be considered nonsense.

All of it. Best interest of the client? If you can find someone that can be bothered to advise you when they know there will be no ongoing business for them, then you'll be lucky, or their fee from your pot size doesn't make it worth their while because of potential liabilities. Not saying these are not valid points or that an IFA isn't within their right to use them. Just saying none of it points to clients best interests.

I must be lucky then. Transfer analysis, positive recommendation and transfer to Royal London completed by IFA two months ago with no ongoing service wrap.

What would you have done if the IFA had recommended leaving your DB pension where it was, Alan_P?

Moved it to A J Bell, which at the time I could have done.

AlanP_2

RoadToRiches said:

AlanP_2 said:

I used https://www.wpsadvisory.com/.

The trustees recommended them, what they did not tell me about was their waiting lists. By which time they take on the case the CETV value will be outdated. Wasted 3 weeks waiting for them to tell me I am due a call back end of JUNE !!!!

All well and good trustees telling me I should have waited until I got an appointment before requesting the CETV but if I have no idea on what the transfer value is I have no idea if I want to progress. There was a certain figure I was looking for and they hit it so then I decided I can work with that and put the wheels in motion ( and they turned very slowly with this firm)

Only made the deadline by the skin of their teeth, with the admin team completing the paperwork and submitting at about 7pm on deadline day.

There is a mismatch between 3 month CETVs and timescale for fact-finding, analysis and reports unfortunately and as I said this was for a scheme they knew inside out.

My advice to anybody else would be to sort your IFA out (if you can find one) well ahead of asking for the CETV. Basic fact finding etc. is not dependent on the CETV number being known - BUT you will be committed to paying whether you like the CETV or not.

BPL

Some schemes have a dashboard where you can get an estimated cetv. 

Dale72

On balance I think I may have been a bit harsh on the industry, after all they are just trying to help us people navigate all the potential perils of financial life!! More to follow.....

[Deleted User]

AlanP_2 said:

ZingPowZing said:

AlanP_2 said:

Dale72 said:

dunstonh said:

Dale72 said:

HappyHarry said:

The advice should only be negative if it is determined that it is not in your best interest to transfer.

There is a repeated implication on these boards that an adviser will almost always give advice to retain a DB pension as it is safer for the adviser.

This is not my experience, nor of other advisers in this area that I have spoken to. You should expect a good adviser working for a fee to give you advice suited to your circumstances, not theirs.

Nonsense, and I think most on here know it.

What bit do you consider nonsense?   I cannot see anything in what HappyHarry wrote that could be considered nonsense.

All of it. Best interest of the client? If you can find someone that can be bothered to advise you when they know there will be no ongoing business for them, then you'll be lucky, or their fee from your pot size doesn't make it worth their while because of potential liabilities. Not saying these are not valid points or that an IFA isn't within their right to use them. Just saying none of it points to clients best interests.

I must be lucky then. Transfer analysis, positive recommendation and transfer to Royal London completed by IFA two months ago with no ongoing service wrap.

What would you have done if the IFA had recommended leaving your DB pension where it was, Alan_P?

Moved it to A J Bell, which at the time I could have done.

So what is the advice for insistent clients now?

The least worst option seems to be: Thank your financial adviser for looking after "your" interests, pay them, pay the next financial adviser for introducing you to a stakeholder pension (generally an indefensible reason for giving up a DB pension) with a view to extricating yourself from the position your financial adviser has left you in. 

Prism

ZingPowZing said:

AlanP_2 said:

ZingPowZing said:

AlanP_2 said:

Dale72 said:

dunstonh said:

Dale72 said:

HappyHarry said:

The advice should only be negative if it is determined that it is not in your best interest to transfer.

There is a repeated implication on these boards that an adviser will almost always give advice to retain a DB pension as it is safer for the adviser.

This is not my experience, nor of other advisers in this area that I have spoken to. You should expect a good adviser working for a fee to give you advice suited to your circumstances, not theirs.

Nonsense, and I think most on here know it.

What bit do you consider nonsense?   I cannot see anything in what HappyHarry wrote that could be considered nonsense.

All of it. Best interest of the client? If you can find someone that can be bothered to advise you when they know there will be no ongoing business for them, then you'll be lucky, or their fee from your pot size doesn't make it worth their while because of potential liabilities. Not saying these are not valid points or that an IFA isn't within their right to use them. Just saying none of it points to clients best interests.

I must be lucky then. Transfer analysis, positive recommendation and transfer to Royal London completed by IFA two months ago with no ongoing service wrap.

What would you have done if the IFA had recommended leaving your DB pension where it was, Alan_P?

Moved it to A J Bell, which at the time I could have done.

So what is the advice for insistent clients now?

The least worst option seems to be: Thank your financial adviser for looking after "your" interests, pay them, pay the next financial adviser for introducing you to a stakeholder pension (generally an indefensible reason for giving up a DB pension) with a view to extricating yourself from the position your financial adviser has left you in. 

I would say that the least worst option is accepting the advice that you have paid for and staying with the DB pension. I'm not convinced there is another option until somebody provides an example of an IFA transferring an insistent client into a stakeholder with all the risk that entails.

[Deleted User]

Prism said:

ZingPowZing said:

AlanP_2 said:

ZingPowZing said:

AlanP_2 said:

Dale72 said:

dunstonh said:

Dale72 said:

HappyHarry said:

The advice should only be negative if it is determined that it is not in your best interest to transfer.

There is a repeated implication on these boards that an adviser will almost always give advice to retain a DB pension as it is safer for the adviser.

This is not my experience, nor of other advisers in this area that I have spoken to. You should expect a good adviser working for a fee to give you advice suited to your circumstances, not theirs.

Nonsense, and I think most on here know it.

What bit do you consider nonsense?   I cannot see anything in what HappyHarry wrote that could be considered nonsense.

All of it. Best interest of the client? If you can find someone that can be bothered to advise you when they know there will be no ongoing business for them, then you'll be lucky, or their fee from your pot size doesn't make it worth their while because of potential liabilities. Not saying these are not valid points or that an IFA isn't within their right to use them. Just saying none of it points to clients best interests.

I must be lucky then. Transfer analysis, positive recommendation and transfer to Royal London completed by IFA two months ago with no ongoing service wrap.

What would you have done if the IFA had recommended leaving your DB pension where it was, Alan_P?

Moved it to A J Bell, which at the time I could have done.

So what is the advice for insistent clients now?

The least worst option seems to be: Thank your financial adviser for looking after "your" interests, pay them, pay the next financial adviser for introducing you to a stakeholder pension (generally an indefensible reason for giving up a DB pension) with a view to extricating yourself from the position your financial adviser has left you in. 

I would say that the least worst option is accepting the advice that you have paid for and staying with the DB pension. I'm not convinced there is another option until somebody provides an example of an IFA transferring an insistent client into a stakeholder with all the risk that entails.

So, in the case of AlanP_2, his best option as an insistent client today would be to stick with his DB pension. 

Even if it is not his best option. 

I know the ideal is that the financial adviser will act in the interests of the client. I would say from personal experience that is a coin toss and that is more generous than the findings of the FCA)

https://www.fca.org.uk/publications/multi-firm-reviews/defined-benefit-pension-transfers

As such, we are concerned that 69% of the 234,951 total members seeking advice had been recommended to transfer. 

Am I missing anything?

[Deleted User]

Once financial advisers have authority over pension freedom, pension freedom is dead.

NotaBene12

ZingPowZing said:

Once financial advisers have authority over pension freedom, pension freedom is dead.

Spot on.

What about free will and informed consent?

The role of the IFA should be about educating you on the pros and cons of the options and, maybe, giving his opinion on what he thinks is best for you - but he should not be able to stop you from proceeding as you wish. Yet, this is what happens here.

Something has gone terribly wrong.

dunstonh

The role of the IFA should be about educating you on the pros and cons of the options and, maybe, giving his opinion on what he thinks is best for you - but he should not be able to stop you from proceeding as you wish. Yet, this is what happens here.

The IFA is not stopping you from proceeding.