Being forced to use a Financial Advisor to transfer pension to pension.

scoobyjones1

Hoenir said:

scoobyjones1 said:

Mutton_Geoff said:

Interesting thread but I can't help thinking the OP and his wife probably have other pensions in addition to their two state pensions so money is not an issue. Even if their only other income was state pension, this locked in DB scheme is only due to pay 10% of their pension income. In reality with other pension income, it's likely to be a tiny fraction. Why get so concerned that the financial industry is out to screw you when you could just leave it as it is, pop the monthly income from the DB into a savings account and use it as your holiday fund.

You won't be able to convince the government to let you transfer the state pension so you're already going to have multiple income sources in retirement, why not just relax and enjoy them? I can't believe there are 18 pages of bubble about a £2k pension.

The DB fund in question has no death benefits. So say she is knocked down by a bus (we nearly were, yesterday!) the pension would die with her. 

Normally there's a dependents benefit payable. 

Not in this case I'm afraid. This was an old pension for a now non existent firm, the new company took over the pension scheme...so maybe it's down to that....I don't know. The paperwork she has been given states clearly the Death Benefit to spouse or other as 0.00%

xylophone

Death Benefit to spouse as 0.00%

I wonder does this mean some form of "death before pension age" lump sum rather than a widow (er) pension?

Of course all will depend on the Rules of the Scheme - not impossible that there were no benefits for dependants or possibly only a pension if there were a widow rather than widower.

If the OP's wife does intend to obtain advice concerning a transfer out, the  PTS will take into account all aspects - he could consider that the lack of spousal benefits would be a factor in favour of a positive recommendation.

If a large component of the pension is pre 88 GMP so that there would be no increase in payment, then he might consider that a factor in favour of a positive recommendation.

Silvertabby

scoobyjones1 said:

Hoenir said:

scoobyjones1 said:

Mutton_Geoff said:

Interesting thread but I can't help thinking the OP and his wife probably have other pensions in addition to their two state pensions so money is not an issue. Even if their only other income was state pension, this locked in DB scheme is only due to pay 10% of their pension income. In reality with other pension income, it's likely to be a tiny fraction. Why get so concerned that the financial industry is out to screw you when you could just leave it as it is, pop the monthly income from the DB into a savings account and use it as your holiday fund.

You won't be able to convince the government to let you transfer the state pension so you're already going to have multiple income sources in retirement, why not just relax and enjoy them? I can't believe there are 18 pages of bubble about a £2k pension.

The DB fund in question has no death benefits. So say she is knocked down by a bus (we nearly were, yesterday!) the pension would die with her. 

Normally there's a dependents benefit payable. 

Not in this case I'm afraid. This was an old pension for a now non existent firm, the new company took over the pension scheme...so maybe it's down to that....I don't know. The paperwork she has been given states clearly the Death Benefit to spouse or other as 0.00%

All pre 1988 service?  If so, that's the case for all public sector women's pensions, and probably private DB schemes as well.

scoobyjones1

xylophone said:

Death Benefit to spouse as 0.00%

I wonder does this mean some form of "death before pension age" lump sum rather than a widow (er) pension?

Of course all will depend on the Rules of the Scheme - not impossible that there were no benefits for dependants or possibly only a pension if there were a widow rather than widower.

If the OP's wife does intend to obtain advice concerning a transfer out, the  PTS will take into account all aspects - he could consider that the lack of spousal benefits would be a factor in favour of a positive recommendation.

If a large component of the pension is pre 88 GMP so that there would be no increase in payment, then he might consider that a factor in favour of a positive recommendation.

My thoughts as well, xylophone. It is really not a great pension, although she is glad to have it. She just wants to have control over the amount now, leave some to kids/grandkids... and other than putting by £166 a month and hoping she lives a very long time she cannot do that. There is no advantage to it in our eyes. Yes, it is guaranteed but life is not. Even if she just holds the CETV as cash earning compound interest, within her SIPP, with the added comfort of knowing it is accessible in an emergency, then that is of more use to her. Surely an IFA could understand this. 
Most people in this scheme do want out of it and I can't blame them.

Pat38493

xylophone said:

Death Benefit to spouse as 0.00%

I wonder does this mean some form of "death before pension age" lump sum rather than a widow (er) pension?

Of course all will depend on the Rules of the Scheme - not impossible that there were no benefits for dependants or possibly only a pension if there were a widow rather than widower.

If the OP's wife does intend to obtain advice concerning a transfer out, the  PTS will take into account all aspects - he could consider that the lack of spousal benefits would be a factor in favour of a positive recommendation.

If a large component of the pension is pre 88 GMP so that there would be no increase in payment, then he might consider that a factor in favour of a positive recommendation.

Would an IFA be able to count it in favour of a transfer if the person does not need the money?  If the person has way more pension than they will ever need, could that be a reason to recommend transfer, or does it have to be assessed always rationally based on the individual pension itself?

scoobyjones1

Silvertabby said:

scoobyjones1 said:

Hoenir said:

scoobyjones1 said:

Mutton_Geoff said:

Interesting thread but I can't help thinking the OP and his wife probably have other pensions in addition to their two state pensions so money is not an issue. Even if their only other income was state pension, this locked in DB scheme is only due to pay 10% of their pension income. In reality with other pension income, it's likely to be a tiny fraction. Why get so concerned that the financial industry is out to screw you when you could just leave it as it is, pop the monthly income from the DB into a savings account and use it as your holiday fund.

You won't be able to convince the government to let you transfer the state pension so you're already going to have multiple income sources in retirement, why not just relax and enjoy them? I can't believe there are 18 pages of bubble about a £2k pension.

The DB fund in question has no death benefits. So say she is knocked down by a bus (we nearly were, yesterday!) the pension would die with her. 

Normally there's a dependents benefit payable. 

Not in this case I'm afraid. This was an old pension for a now non existent firm, the new company took over the pension scheme...so maybe it's down to that....I don't know. The paperwork she has been given states clearly the Death Benefit to spouse or other as 0.00%

All pre 1988 service?  If so, that's the case for all public sector women's pensions, and probably private DB schemes as well.

Yes I think she joined the scheme in 86 and left, end March, 88. No death benefit. Not good eh?

xylophone

Surely an IFA could understand this. 

He might very well take the view that in your wife's position, (substantial  retirement provision over and above state pension / the small deferred DB pension/, no spousal benefit/ limited or no increase in payment on DB pension etc) a transfer out would be suitable.

She won't find out unless she engages an adviser.

Has she yet rung round to make preliminary enquiries concerning fees?

xylophone

Would an IFA be able to count it in favour of a transfer if the person does not need the money?  If the person has way more pension than they will ever need, could that be a reason to recommend transfer,

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/pension-transfer-defined-benefit

Who is best suited to a transfer

Under certain circumstances, a transfer may be suitable for your needs if:

• you won’t rely only on your DB scheme to meet your income needs but will have other sources of retirement income

scoobyjones1

xylophone said:

Surely an IFA could understand this. 

He might very well take the view that in your wife's position, (substantial  retirement provision over and above state pension / the small deferred DB pension/, no spousal benefit/ limited or no increase in payment on DB pension etc) a transfer out would be suitable.

She won't find out unless she engages an adviser.

Has she yet rung round to make preliminary enquiries concerning fees?

We have contacted one that we know..an old friend and hopefully he can help. Waiting on him and then she will ring round some others.

scoobyjones1

xylophone said:

Would an IFA be able to count it in favour of a transfer if the person does not need the money?  If the person has way more pension than they will ever need, could that be a reason to recommend transfer,

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/pension-transfer-defined-benefit

Who is best suited to a transfer

Under certain circumstances, a transfer may be suitable for your needs if:

• you won’t rely only on your DB scheme to meet your income needs but will have other sources of retirement income

Yes!! That's exactly what I have been trying to get across on here. A transfer is what she wants, based on good reasoning and previous experience. She managed some big companies. Some of the derisory comments on here have been a shock. Had to "ignore" a few people.
I am so glad you and a few others are beginning to see it...
Thanks for the link. There's a beer in the post ;-)