Hoops to jump through for transfer to SIPP

Qyburn

dunstonh said:

Did the other four use Origo?

I don't know that.  The four were two different instances of Aviva, Legal and General and Royal London.  The one making difficulties was/is Reassure. All transfers to the same destination.

dunstonh

 The four were two different instances of Aviva, Legal and General and Royal London.  The one making difficulties was/is Reassure. All transfers to the same destination.

Aviva, L&G and Royal London use Origo.  Exceptions are some old legacy plans that are S32s and S226s.    Aviva (Friends Life) often send the form out with discharge forms but don't need either discharge forms or the form where Origo is involved.  Not seen the form issued once with Aviva (NU) plans.

ReAssure use Origo with some of the legacy books but not all (I believe that is a work in progress as they get more legacy books onto their latest software).

handful

Albermarle said:

then my choice of investments is none of their business!

Just tell them something well known and middle of the road, Like Vanguard Life strategy 60.

Once the money is transferred you can invest it where you like.

That's strangely enough is exactly what I did do! Thanks

handful

gm0 said:

This time I think they are about the FCA being somewhat concerned about excess cash holdings for the very long term which they view as naive vs inflation and thus increasing the risk and spread of failure. But I could be wrong about why that particular one happens.

The reason that I want to transfer this pot to my SIPP is to allow the money to work a bit harder than it has done in the 25 years since I stopped contributing to it. It's highly likely I won't be leaving it as cash for sure

Good point though, thanks.

calltobala

handful said:

k_man said:

I went through a similar process with PL.
I think the red flag was similar to the OP, in stating I did not yet know what I was specifically going to invest in, once it was in the SIPP (hadn't completely decided at the time).

Similar questionairres, and a due diligence call with PL.
Finally they asked me to have a Pension Safeguarding call with Moneyhelper (to ensure I understood the risks, and was aware of scams etc).
Once I had that call, the transfer eventually progressed.

This was for a cash/Origo transfer.
Process took about 3 months.

Their due diligence processes seemed quite keen, and a stark contrast all my other transfers, all via Origo, all of which completed without question within 2 weeks.

All of these were this year.

The PL one just seemed like hard work!

It genuinely feels like they are trying to block me regardless of whether I am making the right decision or not! I understand the scam prevention aspect but when they have satisfied themselves that I'm not being scammed then my choice of investments is none of their business!

I am going to deal with this for Standard life group stake holders pension to Interactive SIPP transfer . After reading it i can confirm this. In mu opinion, During bear market when all stocks/funds kept crashing they will try to sell you at lowest price while waiting so that they can make required profits during the waiting time between paper work. I think they try to make their profit by delaying, lot of people say transfer happend quickly and most of the time during Bull market so selling quicker would be better for them i guess.

dunstonh

I am going to deal with this for Standard life group stake holders pension to Interactive SIPP transfer  .

Standard Life are one of the better ones.  Typically, 3-5 days.

After reading it i can confirm this. In mu opinion, During bear market when all stocks/funds kept crashing they will try to sell you at lowest price while waiting so that they can make required profits during the waiting time between paper work. 

That is complete BS.

 I think they try to make their profit by delaying, 

They dont.  Indeed, the longer it takes, the greater the cost.

Qyburn

Qyburn said:

I don't know that.  The four were two different instances of Aviva, Legal and General and Royal London.  The one making difficulties was/is Reassure. All transfers to the same destination.

Reassure are now really digging their heels in with a new questionnaire to be completed with even more detailed and intrusive questions.  They want not just the name, company and FCA ID for our adviser, but they want copies of all material and recommendations provided by any adviser.  Also want explanations from us as to (1) what do we want to achieve by transferring and (2) justification for why this couldn't be achieved leaving the funds still with Reassure.

They've already had the first form with all the details of the receiving scheme, and that covered the basics about scam indications and whether we spoke to Pension Wise etc.

All other plans transferred OK. So I guess the fall back plan is what to do if transfer from Reassure proves impossible.

dunstonh

 They want not just the name, company and FCA ID for our adviser, but they want copies of all material and recommendations provided by any adviser. 

It is not uncommon for there to be a section to provide adviser details (or even for the adviser to sign).  However, I have never seen one request a copy of the recommendation unless it has had significant safeguarded benefits (typically DB schemes rather than DC schemes).

Either they have taken a turn towards incompetence or they suspect something is up.

Qyburn

dunstonh said:

Either they have taken a turn towards incompetence or they suspect something is up.

I suspect the former. The value is relatively low so instead of transferring we could possibly just take it in two chunks in separate tax years. Assuming they don't have the same obstructive attitude to drawing down.

woolly_wombat

Qyburn said:

dunstonh said:

Either they have taken a turn towards incompetence or they suspect something is up.

I suspect the former. The value is relatively low so instead of transferring we could possibly just take it in two chunks in separate tax years. Assuming they don't have the same obstructive attitude to drawing down.

Are you absolutely certain that this is not a legacy pension, eg Section 32, that comes with valuable GMP attached, plus additional increases in deferment that aren’t made obvious to Joe public?

The stated value of the pension is unlikely reflect the cost of providing the GMP if that were the case.

What is the stated reason for blocking the transfer?