Is it worth consolidating my pension funds?

noclaf

Albermarle said:

In total I am paying 0.178% in fees, using 3 passive Vanguard funds (2 global, 1 UK), a property fund and a bond fund

That would be very low, but are you sure there is not a platform/management charge on top of the fund charges ?

Ok so it's 0.18%, blurb says 'this is the total amount you currently pay each year for your pension'

 What you pay - 'This is the total amount we charge each year for investing in a fund. It is made up of the total standard charge minis any discount that applies'.
They do mention additional charges could be taken for some funds covering trustees, registrar's, auditors, regulators and custodian fees but for the funds I have picked, no additional fees are mentioned.

Edit: in fact there are additional expenses for all of the funds! Including additional expenses and discount, 4 funds total charge is 0.177%, the property fund is pricier at 0.217% and this bumps up my average total fees to 0.18%

Albermarle

noclaf said:

Albermarle said:

In total I am paying 0.178% in fees, using 3 passive Vanguard funds (2 global, 1 UK), a property fund and a bond fund

That would be very low, but are you sure there is not a platform/management charge on top of the fund charges ?

Ok so it's 0.180%, blurb says 'this is the total amount you currently pay each year for your pension'

 What you pay - 'This is the total amount we charge each year for investing in a fund. It is made up of the total standard charge minis any discount that applies'.
They do mention additional charges could be taken for some funds covering trustees, registrar's, auditors, regulators and custodian fees but for the funds I have picked, no additional fees are mentioned.

In that case you have a very good deal ! My last employer was very large and I though they had negotiated a good deal with 0.17% platform charge + fund charges , some as low as 0.1%.

If you want to double check, you can have a look at the cash account of the pension , if it has one, to see if any regular charges are being taken. Normally the fund charges are taken from the fund itself so you do not see this , but you will see any explicit platform/ management charges coming out of the cash account ( if there are any) .

dunstonh

Edit: in fact there are additional expenses for all of the funds! Including additional expenses and discount, 4 funds total charge is 0.177%, the property fund is pricier at 0.217% and this bumps up my average total fees to 0.18%

They will be the TC and IC that you see on OEICs/UTs etc that nobody takes any notice of as they are not explicit charges.

noclaf

Albermarle said:

In that case you have a very good deal ! My last employer was very large and I though they had negotiated a good deal with 0.17% platform charge + fund charges , some as low as 0.1%.

If you want to double check, you can have a look at the cash account of the pension , if it has one, to see if any regular charges are being taken. Normally the fund charges are taken from the fund itself so you do not see this , but you will see any explicit platform/ management charges coming out of the cash account ( if there are any) .

I downloaded 5 years of transactions, just shows employer and employee contributions + any transfers in from other schemes. No 'fee' type transactions shown.
My employer is one of the big 4 Acc/Audit firms....that may of helped negotiate the reduced fees. I am happy with the fees though I've heard of cheaper at other firms so maybe there is room to push down those fees a bit more!

gm0

The old accounting firms in particular did some cracking deals at various points now many decades ago with the life companies.    And a few other business to business corporates no doubt.

"Balance of trade" was I believe the ambiguous term used to describe arm twisting and general back scratching that seems to have gone on in what then were actual smoke filled rooms.  Whether this was nodding and winking around audit "rotation" events and retendering or via advisory contracts to be placed and discount deals on pension scheme funds under management to be placed (these being highly attractive for the life and pensions company - a new large employer).  One cannot now say let alone prove.  So let's assume it's all above board and by the book.  The 1980s book anyway.

For once though some of the benefits flowed through to junior staff in the form of lower scheme charges and fund management deals.  No doubt because at the time the bosses were using the scheme as well. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of this old school approach to business it is another illustration of why it is beneficial that the pension benefits of the boss class and of the staff should be aligned and ideally maintained within the same schemes so that incentives remain aligned re cuts/enhancement thereof.  And it's also why the parasitic davos visiting first up against the wall boss class have generally separated them off in recent decades whenever and wherever they can all the better to squeeze down on costs "for them" and meanwhile line their own pockets to the maximum extent. An unhelpful positive feedback loop.  When pensions are perceived as less good. They become less salient around employment contract vs headline wages and the objections are less when it is squeezed or withers a bit more via neglect.  Sadly compounded by the "levelling down" introduced by the government around auto-enrollment and broadening uptake (a good thing but with negative externalities).  Who now would setup a very generous contributory scheme when nobody much would be expecting it and it would not be viewed as especially salient to hiring in the modern era relative to other factors.

For OP in their checking and others reading.  Rules of thumb are NOT the way to go. 

It is never wise to just assume "old" = bad.  You ALWAYS need to check.

Albermarle

It is never wise to just assume "old" = bad.  You ALWAYS need to check.

As it is also never wise to assume 'Workplace Pension' Bad - ' Shiny new SIPP' Good , as many new posters seem to think.

Especially if they do not like their employer, they assume they must be getting a bad deal with their workplace pension, when they are probably not.