Please help, cannot collect pension pot without form signing!!!

coyrls

ZingPowZing wrote: »

Because they knew that the firm asking for the signature only accepts business via an intermediary and that they could not be the intermediary (because they do not place business with other firms).

Maybe. But the layman doesn't. And it's not something Hargreaves Lansdown tell a client when they are pitching for a DB pension, in my experience. Sure, it's there in 10pt new-roman on the back of an A4 sheet of paper "What you should know about transferring a DB pension," slipped between the rest of their handouts but, for obvious reasons, HL won't mention the difficulties faced by a client whom they take down that path: less time, less choice, less protection,no assistance -Ladies and gentlemen, introducing "the Hargreaves Lansdown experience."

I know informed people on here will continue to say "caveat emptor" but for the general public it represents a miserable experience, like buying a television and finding you have to take the back off to change channel.

I agree they are not very transparent about the status of their advice; you would need to do your own research and not rely on their material.

pip895

When I was considering my DB transfer I had initial discussions with three companies. Hargreaves Lansdown, Tideway and Drewberry. I discounted HL because the £1500 initial fee would have been a dead loss if they found against transferring - I don't remember there being any question about this.

[Zing.. did this initial look provide a positive recommendation for you and the full assessment throw up something that changed it - I thought they said there wouldn't be any further charge if that happened but might be wrong about that..]

HL were the most expensive of the three -Tideway the cheapest. Tideway also gave you an initial look see FOC which essentially served the same purpose as the £1500 offering from HL but they lacked the personal touch of Drewberry

I ended up going with Drewberry and was very impressed - the process was much more involved than I imagined. During it they found a mistake in the figures sent by my pension company and uncovered an error that when corrected gained me several times more than their fee. Im not sure that either the more automated processes of Tideway or HL would have been so thorough Anyway it wasn't easy money for them I would say - I hate to think how much it would have cost at solicitor rates for example.

[Deleted User]

[Zing.. did this initial look provide a positive recommendation for you and the full assessment throw up something that changed it - I thought they said there wouldn't be any further charge if that happened but might be wrong about that..]

No, they were more cute than that, pip.
Initially they said that they should be able to provide a clear indication after the analysis; after the analysis they said my case was "marginal" and "in the balance."
Bear in mind, at this stage the clock is running down on the CETV; the HL client is unlikely to find an alternative adviser willing to rush it through in time.

pip895

ZingPowZing wrote: »

No, they were more cute than that, pip.
Initially they said that they should be able to provide a clear indication after the analysis; after the analysis they said my case was "marginal" and "in the balance."
Bear in mind, at this stage the clock is running down on the CETV; the HL client is unlikely to find an alternative adviser willing to rush it through in time.

I remember the clock ticking thing well! I think we ended up with three CETV's - all at the pension companies expense luckily as it was their issue. I am certainly very glad I didn't go with the HL option. I had to get them to supply an illustration as I was moving the money to them and you wouldn't believe the number of permutations of messing it up they managed:rotfl:

xylophone

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6012796&page=2&highlight=

Post 32 - a poster with a positive experience of a GMP only transfer - that said, it was not a very high CETV and was all pre 88 so would not have been index linked in payment.

[Deleted User]

pip895 wrote: »

I remember the clock ticking thing well! I think we ended up with three CETV's - all at the pension companies expense luckily as it was their issue. I am certainly very glad I didn't go with the HL option. I had to get them to supply an illustration as I was moving the money to them and you wouldn't believe the number of permutations of messing it up they managed:rotfl:

Amen.

For me, the stakes were far higher.

I blundered through and am now in a position to give thanks for being able to to see through the machinations of the HL adviser. His recommendation would now have cost me ten times his fee.
But it could have been even worse. If HL had approved my transfer, I would likely have invested 20% each in Woodford and Hargreaves Lansdown.

Which just goes to show how completely the stars rule our lives.