DB Pension Transfer Advice

Malthusian

But not obligated to act as intermediary on the transfer which is what Standard Life appear to be asking. Unless I have misinterpreted Dave when he said "to present confirmation that you have received the necessary advice is not sufficient" and "the adviser needs to be supporting/ authorising (albeit against advice) the paperwork side".
Incidentally, if Dave does proceed with a complaint over his existing Stakeholder Pension, it might focus Standard Life's minds if he points out that a) if he goes to the Ombudsman, the CETV will have long expired by the time the Ombudsman looks at it, b) if the Ombudsman finds in his favour Standard Life will be liable for any losses that result from him having to get a fresh CETV which may be lower than the current one.

ukdw

Post deleted

Albermarle

Bad decisions by novice investors with more money than they have ever handled are a way bigger risk than the range of investment outcomes, IMO.

Yes and as well , with the money burning a hole in their pocket , the idea of a 4or 5% SWR might be immediately discarded in favour of  live today , forget about tomorrow, spending splurges.

RoadToRiches

Malthusian said:

But not obligated to act as intermediary on the transfer which is what Standard Life appear to be asking. Unless I have misinterpreted Dave when he said "to present confirmation that you have received the necessary advice is not sufficient" and "the adviser needs to be supporting/ authorising (albeit against advice) the paperwork side".
Incidentally, if Dave does proceed with a complaint over his existing Stakeholder Pension, it might focus Standard Life's minds if he points out that a) if he goes to the Ombudsman, the CETV will have long expired by the time the Ombudsman looks at it, b) if the Ombudsman finds in his favour Standard Life will be liable for any losses that result from him having to get a fresh CETV which may be lower than the current one.

I have my current stakeholder pension with them, current employer contributing. If he can get the form signed to say he has had advise this will be good enough. Let me know if you have this Dave if you really want to transfer against advice. It won’t be Standard Life to start though

dunstonh

RoadToRiches said:

Pablo7474 said:

arty688 said:

Interesting so Standard Life accept insistent clients.

I don’t think this means anything, try and find an adviser willing to sign the forms when they have advised against!! 

IFA is obligated to sign the form to say you have taken full regulated advice by their regulator, the FCA.

But is not obligated to place the transaction through their agency and take liability for it.

The distribution channels are either direct to consumer or via an intermediary.    A provider that caters for the intermediary market does not have to offer their product direct to consumer or vice versa.    The majority of SL products are intermediary only.  This passes the liability of the sale to the adviser.

The SL stakeholder is an unknown beast because it's unclear whether it is sold as direct to consumer or whether they have an in-house team acting as intermediaries to set it.   If it is the latter then they could refuse it on the basis of distribution.      

RoadToRiches

No but with the signed form you can take it to a provider who will accept insistent clients acting against the advice

Albermarle

 The majority of SL products are intermediary only.  This passes the liability of the sale to the adviser.

The retail side of the business, ( now owned by Phoenix but still branded as Standard Life) still accepts business direct from consumer for personal pensions and Sipps, and as far as I know this is where the stakeholder is located .

DaveT55

Interesting so Standard Life accept insistent clients.

Most intermediary providers/platforms will accept insistent clients as long as it goes via the adviser's agency.   The problem is that if it goes through the adviser agency, then the adviser takes on the liability.     

Apologies for any confusion - This is pretty much exactly what SL stated to me.  

DaveT55

RoadToRiches said:

Malthusian said:

But not obligated to act as intermediary on the transfer which is what Standard Life appear to be asking. Unless I have misinterpreted Dave when he said "to present confirmation that you have received the necessary advice is not sufficient" and "the adviser needs to be supporting/ authorising (albeit against advice) the paperwork side".
Incidentally, if Dave does proceed with a complaint over his existing Stakeholder Pension, it might focus Standard Life's minds if he points out that a) if he goes to the Ombudsman, the CETV will have long expired by the time the Ombudsman looks at it, b) if the Ombudsman finds in his favour Standard Life will be liable for any losses that result from him having to get a fresh CETV which may be lower than the current one.

I have my current stakeholder pension with them, current employer contributing. If he can get the form signed to say he has had advise this will be good enough. Let me know if you have this Dave if you really want to transfer against advice. It won’t be Standard Life to start though

YES - If there is any possible route available to remove from the DB provider then we want it out.   

I am waiting for the official cash evaluation, at the moment it is only an indicative value. This is expected in the next 10 days. The appointment for the necessary advice is exactly 1 month away. I know other advisors could do this sooner, but this is the first date available with the advisor we are committed to - Wren Sterling. If the 3 months expires then we will have to pay to revalidate the valuation. 

Our age is a serious issue that will almost guarantee a negative outcome as another 15 advisors have stated to me over the last few days when discussing both abridged and full advice. I will confirm with WS that they will definitely sign to say advice has been provided. Below is what their paperwork states, so unclear. I think they are obliged to sign to say this has been provided as you stated previously.

"Following the meeting we will provide our recommendations in a Suitability Report.  Our recommendation may be to remain in the Scheme or to transfer out.  We will always be acting on your behalf and in your best interests and not on behalf of the Company.

Please note that if our advice is to remain in the scheme and you disagree with that advice, we do not then offer you the option of becoming an “insistent client” and transferring out against our advice, as we do not believe that would be in your best interests."

xylophone

The retail side of the business, ( now owned by Phoenix but still branded as Standard Life) still accepts business direct from consumer for personal pensions and Sipps, and as far as I know this is where the stakeholder is located .

It appears to be offered direct to consumer. There is certainly no indication that it is only offered through a tied adviser?

https://www.standardlife.co.uk/pensions/personal-pension/stakeholder