Anyone dealt with this company?

[Deleted User]

1. Meaning of "stakeholder pension scheme."

The seventh condition is that the scheme accepts transfer payments in respect of members’ rights under—

(a)other pension schemes;

But that wouldn't compel a receiving scheme to accept a DB pension transfer, would it? Surely any receiving scheme may decide whether or not accept such a transfer - it being their business. Only AJ Bell - as far as I know - would accept such a transfer without a signature on their own paperwork from the pension transfer specialist who advised in the transfer.

Dox

ZingPowZing said:

1. Meaning of "stakeholder pension scheme."

The seventh condition is that the scheme accepts transfer payments in respect of members’ rights under—

(a)other pension schemes;

But that wouldn't compel a receiving scheme to accept a DB pension transfer, would it? Surely any receiving scheme may decide whether or not accept such a transfer - it being their business. Only AJ Bell - as far as I know - would accept such a transfer without a signature on their own paperwork from the pension transfer specialist who advised in the transfer.

Yes, it would if it's a stakeholder scheme, otherwise it can't be classed as such. Stakeholder pensions are currently the only type of pension required to accept transfers in from any other UK registered pension arrangement. If the receiving scheme wants to set its own conditions, that's fine - but it can't then be a stakeholder pension.

Read the legislation again, especially the bit at the beginning, viz:

A pension scheme is a stakeholder pension scheme for the purposes of this Part if it is registered as such a scheme under section 2 and each of the following is fulfilled, namely—

(a)the conditions set out in subsections (2) [F1to [F2(10)[F2(9)]]]; and

(b)such other conditions as may be prescribed.

Brynsam

ZingPowZing said:

1. Meaning of "stakeholder pension scheme."

The seventh condition is that the scheme accepts transfer payments in respect of members’ rights under—

(a)other pension schemes;

But that wouldn't compel a receiving scheme to accept a DB pension transfer, would it? Surely any receiving scheme may decide whether or not accept such a transfer - it being their business. Only AJ Bell - as far as I know - would accept such a transfer without a signature on their own paperwork from the pension transfer specialist who advised in the transfer.

No pension provider has to accept transfers in if they don't want to, but if that's the case, they would simply offer an 'ordinary' (non-stakeholder) personal pension or a SIPP.

But if they want to offer a stakeholder pension, they have to abide by the legislation. Look at stakeholder applications/transfer in forms/key feature documents from the Pru, Standard Life...no requirement for advice when transferring in from a DB scheme (although if the CETV is £30K plus, advice would be needed to satisfy the ceding DB scheme - but the receiving stakeholder wouldn't have to know that).

Many personal pension providers are running scared of accepting transfers from DB schemes, but a stakeholder has a bullet proof defence: they cannot refuse it, which is why some insurers are very happy to have stakeholder products in their range.

[Deleted User]

Ah thank you both. 
I (clearly) don't know anything about stakeholder pensions but they must have some appeal . Yet the route from DB pension to stakeholder pension is not well trodden -or is it?

bigadaj

I thought this has been discussed before and it was determined that there weren't any stakeholder schemes that were open to new investments?

Brynsam

ZingPowZing said:

Ah thank you both. 
I (clearly) don't know anything about stakeholder pensions but they must have some appeal . Yet the route from DB pension to stakeholder pension is not well trodden -or is it?

It might have been better trodden if more advisers were aware of the requirement for stakeholder pension schemes to accept transfers in. Articles such as this from as far back as 2016 indicate that not too many cottoned on to the DB to stakeholder/stakeholder to SIPP possibility:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/financial-planning/i-was-forced-to-waste-1k-on-advice-when-all-i-wanted-was-to-move1/

bigadaj said:

I thought this has been discussed before and it was determined that there weren't any stakeholder schemes that were open to new investments?

Not correct. See https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/stakeholder-pensions

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm certainly not advocating that people should transfer - but I do think they should be made aware of all their options.

[Deleted User]

 Articles such as this from as far back as 2016 indicate that not too many cottoned on to the DB to stakeholder/stakeholder to SIPP possibility:

 See what you did there, Brynsam.
Apart from being a stepping stone to a SIPP, is there a good reason to transfer a DB pension to a stakeholder pension, iyo?

dunstonh

bigadaj said:

I thought this has been discussed before and it was determined that there weren't any stakeholder schemes that were open to new investments?

A handful.  However, most of those left only retail via intermediaries and they would be the blocker.  However, I believe there are one or two that still accept direct to client.

xylophone

It might have been better trodden if more advisers were aware of the requirement for stakeholder pension schemes to accept transfers in.

Pru knows, y' know....... (apologies to Hylda Baker)

 https://www.pruadviser.co.uk/knowledge-literature/knowledge-library/transfer-pension-scheme/

However, although most schemes provide the right to transfer, not every scheme has to accept an incoming transfer.

A stakeholder pension scheme is currently the only type of scheme which must accept any transfer from another registered pension scheme.

garmeg

dunstonh said:

bigadaj said:

I thought this has been discussed before and it was determined that there weren't any stakeholder schemes that were open to new investments?

A handful.  However, most of those left only retail via intermediaries and they would be the blocker.  However, I believe there are one or two that still accept direct to client.

Could you not open a stakeholder via, say, Cavendish and then do the transfer in directly to the provider once the stakeholder is open?

Not advocating this as in 99% of cases a DB to DC transfer is a bad idea.