DB Transfer

RoadToRiches

jamesd said:

ZingPowZing said:.

But now that the AJ Bell expedient is no longer available, it seems from other recent posts on the board that finding a provider willing to accept the transfer is complicated to unworkable in the timeframe of a valid CETV. When you say you know that an insistent client can proceed, is that a matter of faith or do you know a workable route you could share if you so choose?

Standard Life told me on the phone today that they would accept a transfer into their Stakeholder product by an IFA when that IFA had advised not transferring.

Plenty of others that can be asked if there isn't an IFA willing to transfer on insistent client basis.

One nice thing about the way HappyHarry does it is the being up front and rejecting potential clients where that might happen. I don't like the overall approach that amounts to taking a personal or business view that the pension freedoms were wrong but it's one of the most ethical ways of implementing that view.

Wish they would make their minds up I had contacted Standard Life via member portal, my employer uses them for my pension.

They told me they would not accept insistent clients acting against IFA advice and the IFA would need sign off the transfer for them to accept it.

Dale72

ZingPowZing said:

(I) FA s have my sympathy. They have been placed in a terrible vice, rather like petty officials sent abroad, ostensibly to "help" the local population in far-flung outposts of the British Empire.

The pity is, most financial advisers are nice people.

https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/shooting-an-elephant/

I'm sure they are, and I've got nothing against them personally, I just wish they operated in a system that was set up so they can advise and not decide, unless that's what the client wants them to do.

[Deleted User]

Dale72 said:

The advisors job is to give advice, which the seeker of that advice is then free to take or ignore, depending on what they see as being in their best interest. Although my question was specifically aimed around a comment, a rather patronizing comment the like of which I've seen from several people, along the lines of 'like a lottery win' or 'they'll blow it on a new kitchen or holiday' etc etc. Why does it seem to rankle with some so much how someone else chooses to spend their money, other than a long outdated patrician notion that the 'masses' can't be trusted with too much cash. Its none of your business!!!

Partly legacy, Dale72.

In the old days, the only obligation to pension customers was an annual statement, six-months in arrears. Similarly, anyone encouraged to buy shares in privatisations or company schemes  - labelled "Sid" - was treated with similar contempt.

Naturally, some old hands of the "City"  pine for those halcyon days; and their representatives on this board - and those who want to earn brownie points backing them up - echo that patronising  attitude. 

Thrugelmir

Dale72 said:

Marcon said:

No - the seismic change was that people could 'flexibly' access their DC pot, including the option to take the lot as cash (albeit with tax implications) rather than buy an annuity. Far too many for whom a transfer is highly unlikely to be in their best interests have been dazzled by the ££££,  as have rather too many unscrupulous/incompetent advisers.

What qualifies you to judge what's in other peoples best interest?

As night follows day. In the litigious culture we live in. At some point there's going to be a trigger that causes a considerable financial impact to many peoples wealth. There'll be no shortage of fee free solicitors drumming up business for bad advised transfers. Life is just so predictable. 

Silvertabby

Thrugelmir said:

Dale72 said:

Marcon said:

No - the seismic change was that people could 'flexibly' access their DC pot, including the option to take the lot as cash (albeit with tax implications) rather than buy an annuity. Far too many for whom a transfer is highly unlikely to be in their best interests have been dazzled by the ££££,  as have rather too many unscrupulous/incompetent advisers.

What qualifies you to judge what's in other peoples best interest?

As night follows day. In the litigious culture we live in. At some point there's going to be a trigger that causes a considerable financial impact to many peoples wealth. There'll be no shortage of fee free solicitors drumming up business for bad advised transfers. Life is just so predictable. 

When the 'freedoms' were announced, I gave it 10 years before the Ombudsman found themselves dealing with complaints from those who had transferred their LGPS benefits to 'cash it in quick' pensions -  screaming 'poor me' because their money had run out.

The clock is ticking. 

dunstonh

along the lines of 'like a lottery win' or 'they'll blow it on a new kitchen or holiday' etc etc. Why does it seem to rankle with some so much how someone else chooses to spend their money, other than a long outdated patrician notion that the 'masses' can't be trusted with too much cash. Its none of your business!!!

The last 35 years have shown us time and again that when people blow all their money, they complain that its not their fault and they should get compensation.

Lets also remember that the companies that the FCA is now taking to task mostly did cases that people wanted to transfer out on.   

I'm sure they are, and I've got nothing against them personally, I just wish they operated in a system that was set up so they can advise and not decide, unless that's what the client wants them to do.

And advisers want the same.  Apart from the fly by night factory line companies looking for that quick buck, the rest want a healthy and friendly business relationship with their clients. 

Wish they would make their minds up I had contacted Standard Life via member portal, my employer uses them for my pension.

They told me they would not accept insistent clients acting against IFA advice and the IFA would need sign off the transfer for them to accept it.

That is what they told James as well. 

Dale72

I disagree dunstonh, there is simply no evidence to suggest that when people blow their money (there it is again) on the things they wish to, they then go on to complain. What you may be getting confused with are the complaints that arise when people's money is stolen by spivs and fraudsters masquerading as financial advisors. Understandable complaints, as this is not what the clients wanted their money to go to. The solution? Crack down on the spivs and not on the ability of people to use their pension as they see fit.

dunstonh

I disagree dunstonh, there is simply no evidence to suggest that when people blow their money (there it is again) on the things they wish to, they then go on to complain

Complaints stats would disagree.

hat you may be getting confused with are the complaints that arise when people's money is stolen by spivs and fraudsters masquerading as financial advisors. 

They don't appear in the complaints stats as they are not against regulated firms (normally)

Nebulous2

Dale72 said:

The advisors job is to give advice, which the seeker of that advice is then free to take or ignore, depending on what they see as being in their best interest. Although my question was specifically aimed around a comment, a rather patronizing comment the like of which I've seen from several people, along the lines of 'like a lottery win' or 'they'll blow it on a new kitchen or holiday' etc etc. Why does it seem to rankle with some so much how someone else chooses to spend their money, other than a long outdated patrician notion that the 'masses' can't be trusted with too much cash. Its none of your business!!!

There is a lengthy battle on many fronts, between controlling people and freedom, with the pendulum swinging from one to the other - and back again. 

The concern about letting people spend their money was largely couched as being about them then needing state support. Giving people generous tax concessions in a pension scheme to let them prepare for their future doesn't work if they spend it all and then need additional public funds to help with rent / council tax etc. 

The new state pension probably goes some way to resolve that. Blocking access to any benefits above state pension might be a way to go for people who have 'liberated' their pension. 

Dale72

You say that complaint stats disagree, but again I think that's a little disingenuous. Show me the stats where someone who has got exactly what they expected or were led to believe, and don't include those that were mis-sold or conned into something. They aren't the same thing.