Gaining control over my pension

eskbanker

michael1234 said:

I did have a thought I wonder if a pension is considered an asset then like any other asset can't I dispose of it ? Or in my case, dispose of the part I don't want. It was my understanding I can refuse money from any source and I can close any (in credit) account I own so why not my pension?

It's not as simple as that - there's an argument that a DC pot is an asset within your control, but the DB element isn't (it's a membership of a scheme which will pay out a future income), so it's not an account you own as such. 

There are a plethora of threads in which indignant posters expect unfettered control, citing the 2015 pension freedom legislation, but unfortunately a set of circumstances (some unintended) have conspired to limit the actual degree of freedom realistically available to those with DB pensions or safeguarded benefits, so there really isn't much mileage in the "it's MY money" angle....

Albermarle

In fact pensions are held in trust by the Pension Trustees , so legally they do not actually belong to you anyway .

michael1234

eskbanker said:

michael1234 said:

I did have a thought I wonder if a pension is considered an asset then like any other asset can't I dispose of it ? Or in my case, dispose of the part I don't want. It was my understanding I can refuse money from any source and I can close any (in credit) account I own so why not my pension?

It's not as simple as that - there's an argument that a DC pot is an asset within your control, but the DB element isn't (it's a membership of a scheme which will pay out a future income), so it's not an account you own as such. 

There are a plethora of threads in which indignant posters expect unfettered control, citing the 2015 pension freedom legislation, but unfortunately a set of circumstances (some unintended) have conspired to limit the actual degree of freedom realistically available to those with DB pensions or safeguarded benefits, so there really isn't much mileage in the "it's MY money" angle....

I've always been wary of pensions or indeed any investment requiring 40+ years to see the fruits of and at the mercy of constant changes to legislation.

I can understand why others (particularly those closer to retirement than I am) are pretty annoyed to discover what the situation is. But it is what it is and you'll not find indignation or shouting "ITS MY MONEY" from me.

I was trying to discover how a few hundred quid's worth of contributions could be worth £30,000 and unfortunately despite the best efforts of some on this thread I still don't get it !

DeadlyD

Marcon said:

Albermarle said:

To make it simple I will ignore the hybrid part .
If you just had a DB pension and you want to transfer it out to a DC scheme. You have to ask the scheme administrators for a CETV ( Cash equivalent transfer value) If this is over £30K ,you have to go through an expensive advice process and in the end you may well not be able to transfer it anyway ( this is probably the most discussed topic on this forum with numerous threads on the subject) 
As a guideline a DB pension that promises a guaranteed pension of anything more than £1kpa, will most likely have a CETV of over £30K 

You can.The Pru offers a retail stakeholder (i.e. no adviser required to set one up) which accepts insistent clients.

Application form (it's a retail product, so you can apply direct) 

OP - you'll still need to show the scheme from which you're transferring that you have received advice, but they don't need to see the advice or know what it says. Ditto the Pru as the receiving stakeholder.

Thanks! this looks promising... I think just reading through the links from @xylophone or is it?? 
I will stay on this thread now. I have an appointment tomorrow with a 3rd financial advisor this time from Pensionhelp. 

xylophone

I was trying to discover how a few hundred quid's worth of contributions could be worth £30,000 and unfortunately despite the best efforts of some on this thread I still don't get it !

https://www.thepensionsregulator.gov.uk/en/document-library/regulatory-guidance/transfer-values

Dale72

eskbanker said:

It's not as simple as that - there's an argument that a DC pot is an asset within your control, but the DB element isn't (it's a membership of a scheme which will pay out a future income), so it's not an account you own as such. 

There are a plethora of threads in which indignant posters expect unfettered control, citing the 2015 pension freedom legislation, but unfortunately a set of circumstances (some unintended) have conspired to limit the actual degree of freedom realistically available to those with DB pensions or safeguarded benefits, so there really isn't much mileage in the "it's MY money" angle....

By a set of circumstances (some unintended), I assume you mean a raft of successful complaints against IFAs for poor advice?

eskbanker

Dale72 said:

eskbanker said:

It's not as simple as that - there's an argument that a DC pot is an asset within your control, but the DB element isn't (it's a membership of a scheme which will pay out a future income), so it's not an account you own as such. 

There are a plethora of threads in which indignant posters expect unfettered control, citing the 2015 pension freedom legislation, but unfortunately a set of circumstances (some unintended) have conspired to limit the actual degree of freedom realistically available to those with DB pensions or safeguarded benefits, so there really isn't much mileage in the "it's MY money" angle....

By a set of circumstances (some unintended), I assume you mean a raft of successful complaints against IFAs for poor advice?

Not really, no, but not intending to go down that well-trodden path that's been done to death on numerous other threads - the point for this one was that pension freedom isn't what many thought it should be (regardless of why/how that situation has arisen).

Malthusian

Dale72 said:

By a set of circumstances (some unintended), I assume you mean a raft of successful complaints against IFAs for poor advice?

The main problem faced by the "it's my money" crowd is not at the IFA level but the provider level. I.e. that every single pension provider (as far as we know) has decided not to accept DB transfers for insistent clients due to the risk that the client comes back and complains.

I don't think any of us saw that coming. It is usually an ironclad law of economics that if something's legal and in demand, it will be produced. Yet the FCA has managed to create an environment where pensions that accept insistent client DB transfers are in demand and legal and yet you can't find anyone willing to provide them. They have created a little piece of economic history.

If someone wants to invest their entire £10 million savings in some scam cryptocurrency or penny shares they can easily do it via UK-regulated platforms and lose all their money within weeks, and the reaction from the regulatory system and the world at large will be a shrug of the shoulders and a "fool and his money", but you can't transfer a £100,000 DB pension against advice.

There are still plenty of advisers willing to give advice on DB transfers. There's no problem at that level. Missold DB transfers are a big issue but not one that concerns the "it's my money" crowd. They can still get a recommendation that they have no intention of following - it's afterwards that it gets difficult.

Marcon

DeadlyD said:

Marcon said:

Albermarle said:

To make it simple I will ignore the hybrid part .
If you just had a DB pension and you want to transfer it out to a DC scheme. You have to ask the scheme administrators for a CETV ( Cash equivalent transfer value) If this is over £30K ,you have to go through an expensive advice process and in the end you may well not be able to transfer it anyway ( this is probably the most discussed topic on this forum with numerous threads on the subject) 
As a guideline a DB pension that promises a guaranteed pension of anything more than £1kpa, will most likely have a CETV of over £30K 

You can.The Pru offers a retail stakeholder (i.e. no adviser required to set one up) which accepts insistent clients.

Application form (it's a retail product, so you can apply direct) 

OP - you'll still need to show the scheme from which you're transferring that you have received advice, but they don't need to see the advice or know what it says. Ditto the Pru as the receiving stakeholder.

Thanks! this looks promising... I think just reading through the links from @xylophone or is it?? 
I will stay on this thread now. I have an appointment tomorrow with a 3rd financial advisor this time from Pensionhelp. 

Apologies - I was wrong and have amended my previous thread. The Pru is not open to new stakeholder business, but will accept transfers in from DB schemes where someone already has a Pru stakeholder. That's no help to anyone who hasn't, and I'm sorry if I raised false hopes.

Dale72

Malthusian said:

The main problem faced by the "it's my money" crowd is not at the IFA level but the provider level. I.e. that every single pension provider (as far as we know) has decided not to accept DB transfers for insistent clients due to the risk that the client comes back and complains.

I don't think any of us saw that coming. It is usually an ironclad law of economics that if something's legal and in demand, it will be produced. Yet the FCA has managed to create an environment where pensions that accept insistent client DB transfers are in demand and legal and yet you can't find anyone willing to provide them. They have created a little piece of economic history.

If someone wants to invest their entire £10 million savings in some scam cryptocurrency or penny shares they can easily do it via UK-regulated platforms and lose all their money within weeks, and the reaction from the regulatory system and the world at large will be a shrug of the shoulders and a "fool and his money", but you can't transfer a £100,000 DB pension against advice.

There are still plenty of advisers willing to give advice on DB transfers. There's no problem at that level. Missold DB transfers are a big issue but not one that concerns the "it's my money" crowd. They can still get a recommendation that they have no intention of following - it's afterwards that it gets difficult.

Still a pig headed refusal to accept where the blame lies. Its the providers that are blocking transfers, Its the FCA that has managed to create an environment, and the poor old innocent IFAs are just caught in the middle the poor little lambs.