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

Malthusian

Diplodicus said:

Seemingly a workable option as proposed by the DB pension transfer advice industry. But who should the insistent client assay for an SSAS provider? 

Throw us a crumb.

In case this was aimed at me (and it was below a quote of my post), I don't give financial advice on Internet forums.

The entire point of a SSAS is that you can get whoever you want to provide it. Your Auntie Ethel can be the Scheme Administrator if you like (as long as she meets HMRC's requirements as a fit and proper auntie).

Diplodicus said:

Correct me if wrong, a client would have to set this up before committing to the much higher fees of a (I)FA. Otherwise, on a (I)FA recommendation not to transfer, the insistent client would be quite unable to effect a transfer on their CETV.

Up to them. But if they didn't have it already in place the CETV would probably expire between the IFA providing a negative recommendation and the SSAS being up and running, and they'd need a new one.

arty688

Interestingly spoke to my mate the other night who is going through the process to quote.

"the guy has fudged my figures so the IFA will say yes"

"I have been told to change my attitude towards risk and go for a very high risk product as the IFA will say no if you want to put the transfer in a medium risk product as there would be no advantage to transfer"

His transfer is going through and the IFA has said yes.

Albermarle

arty688 said:

Interestingly spoke to my mate the other night who is going through the process to quote.

"the guy has fudged my figures so the IFA will say yes"

"I have been told to change my attitude towards risk and go for a very high risk product as the IFA will say no if you want to put the transfer in a medium risk product as there would be no advantage to transfer"

His transfer is going through and the IFA has said yes.

The very high risk product was not maybe Brazilian teak forests- landbanking- airport car park spaces ?

It sounds possibly dodgy . The whole issue about making transfers more difficult came from unwitting people transferring their pension to very high risk , expensive products and losing loads of money.

arty688

My response to him was "that sounds a bit dodgy I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole" but its too late its a done deal so I hope it works out. His plan is to change it medium risk as soon as he can.

Just goes to show there is still some dodgy practices going on out there and the inability to transfer against advise is fueling them.

Diplodicus

Malthusian said:

Diplodicus said:

Seemingly a workable option as proposed by the DB pension transfer advice industry. But who should the insistent client assay for an SSAS provider? 

Throw us a crumb.

In case this was aimed at me (and it was below a quote of my post), I don't give financial advice on Internet forums.

The entire point of a SSAS is that you can get whoever you want to provide it. Your Auntie Ethel can be the Scheme Administrator if you like (as long as she meets HMRC's requirements as a fit and proper auntie).

Just a general appeal to this board's representatives of an industry apparently now routinely proposing the SSAS route as a backstop. And their wingmen. I assume they are confident that it is a practicable solution for their clients; it would be cavalier to propose the SSAS otherwise. As a way forward, I don't think it is workable for most clients but, then, I'm not sitting there advocating it.

How to set up a SSAS pension: 9 steps that can’t be missed

https://prydis.com/insights/2019/how-to-set-up-a-ssas-pension/

Malthusian

Just a general appeal to this board's representatives of an industry apparently now routinely proposing the SSAS route as a backstop. And their wingmen. I assume they are confident that it is a practicable solution for their clients

Nobody on this forum is proposing that anyone transfers to a SSAS. The ability to transfer to a SSAS tends to come up when someone claims incorrectly that you can't cash in a DB pension unless you have a positive recommendation from an adviser.

Whether it is a practicable solution for any given IFA's clients is unlikely to matter a great deal. Most IFAs' clients won't want to look into cashing in a DB pension, those that do won't need to open their own SSAS as they will either stay in the DB scheme or have a positive recommendation, or they will fire their IFA to pursue the insistent client route in which case they're not an IFA's client any more.

Not many people are likely to bother with the complexity and expense of opening a SSAS (especially for the sole reason of cashing in a DB pension) but as not many people want to transfer out of a DB pension against advice it's not a big problem. Even when AJ Bell and PensionBee were accepting insistent clients, the simple task of identifying one of them was a high enough hurdle to make a lot of people decide they couldn't be bothered.

arty688 said:

My response to him was "that sounds a bit dodgy I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole" but its too late its a done deal so I hope it works out. His plan is to change it medium risk as soon as he can.

Just goes to show there is still some dodgy practices going on out there and the inability to transfer against advise is fueling them.

If he can. If the high risk option turns out to involve truffle farms in Cape Verde he may find he can't.

This is exactly the reason I said in one of these threads that the Government should set up a safety valve (e.g. extending the obligation on stakeholder pensions to accept any transfer to Nest) to avoid creating a market for chicken-and-chips advisers to issue positive recommendations that they know are BS, then scarper to Spain and dump the liability on the FSCS (i.e. the general public).

I am not particularly interested in letting people hang themselves but I am interested in the rest of us not having to pay to clean up afterwards.

Who is "the guy" who fudged the figures, out of interest? The IFA, or is there an unregulated third party coaching them on how to get the transfer past the IFA?

arty688

I think 'the guy' was coaching him as well as selling him the products/funds he was transferring to, just hope he is not planning a jet ski holiday on my mates money. At least its only a small part of may mates pension but for others it could be a disaster . but maybe the IFA was in on it too...

Diplodicus

Malthusian said:

Just a general appeal to this board's representatives of an industry apparently now routinely proposing the SSAS route as a backstop. And their wingmen. I assume they are confident that it is a practicable solution for their clients

Whether it is a practicable solution for any given IFA's clients is unlikely to matter a great deal

arty688 said:

My response to him was "that sounds a bit dodgy I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole" but its too late its a done deal so I hope it works out. His plan is to change it medium risk as soon as he can.

Just goes to show there is still some dodgy practices going on out there and the inability to transfer against advise is fueling them.

Of course it matters a great deal. If a workaround doesn't work, it's not a workaround. 

It looks as if those making a living from the pension transfer advice business regard the SSAS route as a "useful concept" to shore up the integrity of the process rather than a literal roadmap; heavily invested in the idea of a way forward if they recommend no transfer, thus satisfying the intention of the legislation; but an idea best appreciated in the abstract rather than its concrete form. Like Stairway to Heaven.

Malthusian

arty688 said:

I think 'the guy' was coaching him as well as selling him the products/funds he was transferring to, just hope he is not planning a jet ski holiday on my mates money.

Prepare for disappointment.

If your mate's guy is not regulated by the FCA he is committing a criminal offence by selling him financial products. Why be hung for a sheep when you can be hung for a Lambo?

It is possible the adviser is innocent but it is probably easier to find a dodgy adviser than to successfully coach a mug to tell convincing enough lies to get a positive recommendation from a legitimate adviser.

At least its only a small part of may mates pension but for others it could be a disaster .

Until your mate transfers his other pensions to whatever products/funds it is as well.

If he's fallen for the patter once to cash in his DB scheme, he can fall for it again. If you're happy to cash in a gold-plated DB pension to invest in truffle farms why wouldn't you do the same with a less valuable DC pension?

Diplodicus said:

Of course it matters a great deal. If a workaround doesn't work, it's not a workaround.

Well it does, so we're all happy.

If someone can't be bothered that's not the same thing as "doesn't work".

Diplodicus

Malthusian said:

arty688 said:

Diplodicus said:

Of course it matters a great deal. If a workaround doesn't work, it's not a workaround.

Well it does, so we're all happy.

If someone can't be bothered that's not the same thing as "doesn't work".

You keep saying that it works but -afaik -the SSAS DB pension transfer route is one from which no MSE poster has ever returned to tell the tale and, clearly, you're interested in the outcome only in as much as it protects the ongoing pension transfer advice business model. Yes, workable in theory but, in practice, for most of the public, it is unrealistic. "Can't be bothered" is a cynical take on clients finding themselves unable to transfer against advice.