Pension has finally landed - As an insistent client acting against advice -*DOORS CLOSED 03/09/2021*

Pablo7474

Well said Jeffmusicals.

Problem with DB advice is the client often sees it from a subjective viewpoint but the adviser has to see it from an objective viewpoint. Often a client would be ok transferring, but is that the right thing to do and can that be demonstrated. 

I hope my comments haven’t upset anyone on here, I just try to show people on here what an adviser may say before they pay £xxxx for them to say it. 

It’s a funny old game, I am pleased I no longer do it! 

Dale72

Finally the OPs are beginning to notice the pompous element on here, who seem only interested in pointless debate about whether someone with a £70k a year pension can squeeze another couple of grand out of it by employing some technical wheeze, while belittling the people with genuine concerns about their financial future.

xylophone

I’m big enough and ugly enough to take my own decisions and the consequences of them

Yes - but the  Pension Transfer Specialist's decision is not preventing your making your own decision.  

It is not he who is preventing you from transferring out.

The obstacles in the way of your transferring out  have been put  there by DC scheme providers.

You could try challenging the decision of a stakeholder pension provider not to accept such a transfer (although this could, and probably would), be a protracted process.

Otherwise, there appears to be a solution (although not an easy one) in the form of the SSAS.

Dale72

xylophone said:

I’m big enough and ugly enough to take my own decisions and the consequences of them

Yes - but the  Pension Transfer Specialist's decision is not preventing your making your own decision.  

It is not he who is preventing you from transferring out.

The obstacles in the way of your transferring out  have been put  there by DC scheme providers.

You could try challenging the decision of a stakeholder pension provider not to accept such a transfer (although this could, and probably would), be a protracted process.

Otherwise, there appears to be a solution (although not an easy one) in the form of the SSAS.

A little disingenuous, as its been a joint effort by the industry as a whole to bring the shutters down, instead of reforming themselves.

Pablo7474

What I don’t understand is, when you say the industry as a whole, how are IFAs to blame? 

Dale72

Pablo7474 said:

What I don’t understand is, when you say the industry as a whole, how are IFAs to blame? 

Because one of the main reasons, if not the main one that has led us to where we are, is the stacks of cases against IFAs for giving poor advice, some of which have been highlighted in these threads. Better advice means many fewer complaints, which means no one feels it necessary to stop Sipp transfers from insistent clients. 

xylophone

A little disingenuous, as its been a joint effort by the industry as a whole to bring the shutters down, instead of reforming themselves.

I am not an IFA and I do not have any connection with an IFA.

The financial advice industry is governed by the law of the land.

As matters stand at the moment, the law requires that advice be taken in respect of certain pension transfers (but not that it should be followed).

The fact that there are obstacles in the way of not following the advice is not the fault of the advisers.

They need to be able to show that they provided what was (in their professional opinion), advice appropriate to the circumstances of their clients and they need to be able to justify their advice in a court of law if it is challenged.

It is not the fault of the advisers if pension providers are unwilling to accept transfers against advice.

 With regard to stakeholder pension providers, it does seem to me that their stance needs to be challenged.

Thrugelmir

Dale72 said:

xylophone said:

I’m big enough and ugly enough to take my own decisions and the consequences of them

Yes - but the  Pension Transfer Specialist's decision is not preventing your making your own decision.  

It is not he who is preventing you from transferring out.

The obstacles in the way of your transferring out  have been put  there by DC scheme providers.

You could try challenging the decision of a stakeholder pension provider not to accept such a transfer (although this could, and probably would), be a protracted process.

Otherwise, there appears to be a solution (although not an easy one) in the form of the SSAS.

A little disingenuous, as its been a joint effort by the industry as a whole to bring the shutters down, instead of reforming themselves.

After the GFC all bankers were painted as being charlatans by the Facebook brigade. Nothing ever changes.  

Dale72

xylophone said:

A little disingenuous, as its been a joint effort by the industry as a whole to bring the shutters down, instead of reforming themselves.

I am not an IFA and I do not have any connection with an IFA.

The financial advice industry is governed by the law of the land.

As matters stand at the moment, the law requires that advice be taken in respect of certain pension transfers (but not that it should be followed).

The fact that there are obstacles in the way of not following the advice is not the fault of the advisers.

They need to be able to show that they provided what was (in their professional opinion), advice appropriate to the circumstances of their clients and they need to be able to justify their advice in a court of law if it is challenged.

It is not the fault of the advisers if pension providers are unwilling to accept transfers against advice.

 With regard to stakeholder pension providers, it does seem to me that their stance needs to be challenged.

Yes it is the fault of the advisors, its their poor advice which ultimately led to where we are now, its logical. Ok, do you think Sipp providers would have stopped accepting insistent clients if no one had ever complained to the FCA about an IFA, of course not. Now the FCA in the complaints upheld against IFAs (unless they are suggesting the IFA should have done something it was impossible for them to do) say they gave poor/misleading/incomplete advice. Therefore if IFAs had given better advice originally we wouldn't have a problem! It's not my opinion, it's logic based on the facts we have to hand.

Dale72

Thrugelmir said:

Dale72 said:

xylophone said:

I’m big enough and ugly enough to take my own decisions and the consequences of them

Yes - but the  Pension Transfer Specialist's decision is not preventing your making your own decision.  

It is not he who is preventing you from transferring out.

The obstacles in the way of your transferring out  have been put  there by DC scheme providers.

You could try challenging the decision of a stakeholder pension provider not to accept such a transfer (although this could, and probably would), be a protracted process.

Otherwise, there appears to be a solution (although not an easy one) in the form of the SSAS.

A little disingenuous, as its been a joint effort by the industry as a whole to bring the shutters down, instead of reforming themselves.

After the GFC all bankers were painted as being charlatans by the Facebook brigade. Nothing ever changes.  

Facebook brigade, the words drip with contempt for a group of people whom you clearly don't think deserve the same level of service as the wealthy.