Consolidating pension pots - can I only transfer these as cash?

Jaunty

Turning  57 next year and probably hanging up my spurs by 60 and belatedly looking at my pension pots. Following various business sales etc in the last 8 years I've gone from one pot to 4 (including my current employer's scheme). Whilst none of the scheme rates are bad, per se, none of them are capped so I'm getting hammered on charges. I can do partial transfers out oy current employer scheme as well to help reduce costs. 

Currently researching SIPP providers, including  how they handle drawdown  and cashback offers (not many, but Charles Stanley have a decent one. But that is a nice bonus not an essential). There will not be much trading here if any, maybe just so rebalancing down the line.  

In Specie  transfers protect you from time out of the market but I am unclear if my funds are all 'in house' Pension funds, which I think means that the transfers would need to be be as cash?  And then I  would choose the fund/funds and allocation in the new SIPP for when the cash lands? 

These are the various pots

SW Pension Portfolio 2
SW Pension Portfolio 3
SW Pension Portfolio 4
Standard Life Managed Pension Fund
Standard Life Multi Asset Managed (20%-60%)
Aviva MyM Future Growth
Avivva MyM Future Consolidation

Any input appreciated, thanks.

gm0

For in specie to be possible.  The exact fund. ISIN (and matching about four other identifiers which should be on your fact sheet) on existing website.  Also needs to exist as a holdable retail marketed fund, and (usually) already be offered on the new platform you are moving to.  

If not. Then as you suspect.  The move needs to be cash. So move cash. Buy similar similar assets in an efficient way at new place.  And the inspecie re-registration game is not for you.    I had global equities in a pension special insured fund in an old occupational.  Not offered with the same ISIN and price elsewhere. So I moved those units to two platforms.  In cash.  

Depending on your access protocol for how/what/when to sell and income. Then a provider who takes income across all funds and preserves balance.  May be for you.  Or a provider who allows a nominated fund - including cash first.  May suit you if you are buffering equity sales and not doing it regularly.  

The defaults vary by platform as to what happens when there isn't any cash for income.  But most will do what you are likely to need - with more or less effort beyond accepting defaults.

I do a monthly income. But there are not automatic trades.  I only sell units at rebalancing.  And I choose what, when. And do limit orders.   Other people are entirely happy with a single multi-asset, or set of funds.  And sales as needed along the way.  More assets kepy in the market by that route.  But you could make a automatic sale or two in a flash crash. No buffer.  It's all swings and roundabouts based on your overall approach to drawdown and handling sequence concerns

Albermarle

SW , SL and Aviva are in the jargon 'insurers' - a traditional type of pension provider.
It means that the money you have in their investment funds is 100% insured against loss. Not against normal investment value movements, but against some sort of unexpected event. However note that they are their investment funds, so that is why you can not transfer them because they are not available in the open market.
In reality they are very similar to many funds that are available in the open market, that are not insured .

Whilst none of the scheme rates are bad, per se, none of them are capped so I'm getting hammered on charges.

If you invest in standard OEIC funds, then SIPP charges are not normally capped, although there might be some reductions as you get up to say £250K.
We often see on the forum people looking to get out of 'expensive ' workplace pensions as they think 'SIPPs' must be cheaper, but it is not always the case and needs careful checking.
For example Aviva and SL pensions usually just have one charge for the platform and the investment fund, whilst SIPPs have two separate charges.
Also sometimes there are employer ( and ex employer) discounts that are not always immediately obvious from the paperwork.
For example my SL pension has a 1.05 % charge but a 0.65% discount from an employer I left 25 years ago.

Marcon

Jaunty said:

Turning  57 next year and probably hanging up my spurs by 60 and belatedly looking at my pension pots. Following various business sales etc in the last 8 years I've gone from one pot to 4 (including my current employer's scheme). Whilst none of the scheme rates are bad, per se, none of them are capped so I'm getting hammered on charges. 

What makes you think you are being 'hammered' just because you have four pots rather than one? Are you sure consolidating would make a difference/improvement? Most modern contracts have charges based on a %age of funds invested, and if your funds have all popped up in the last 8 years, they are likely to be 'modern'.  A few have a 'sliding scale' depending on the amount invested, but rates are rarely 'capped'. 

bjorn_toby_wilde

Further to the points above, consolidation isn’t always a good idea. Utilising the “small pots” rules may be beneficial for you.

Jaunty

Marcon said:

Jaunty said:

Turning  57 next year and probably hanging up my spurs by 60 and belatedly looking at my pension pots. Following various business sales etc in the last 8 years I've gone from one pot to 4 (including my current employer's scheme). Whilst none of the scheme rates are bad, per se, none of them are capped so I'm getting hammered on charges. 

What makes you think you are being 'hammered' just because you have four pots rather than one? Are you sure consolidating would make a difference/improvement? Most modern contracts have charges based on a %age of funds invested, and if your funds have all popped up in the last 8 years, they are likely to be 'modern'.  A few have a 'sliding scale' depending on the amount invested, but rates are rarely 'capped'. 

Thanks. I'm fortunate that the pots are not insignificant, and so even though the rates are discounted,  annual  charges combined are in excess of £2,500 (I've checked). So I think interactive investor or AN Other SIPP provider certainly makes sense for me now. 

Jaunty

Albermarle said:

SW , SL and Aviva are in the jargon 'insurers' - a traditional type of pension provider.
It means that the money you have in their investment funds is 100% insured against loss. Not against normal investment value movements, but against some sort of unexpected event. However note that they are their investment funds, so that is why you can not transfer them because they are not available in the open market.
In reality they are very similar to many funds that are available in the open market, that are not insured .

Whilst none of the scheme rates are bad, per se, none of them are capped so I'm getting hammered on charges.

If you invest in standard OEIC funds, then SIPP charges are not normally capped, although there might be some reductions as you get up to say £250K.
We often see on the forum people looking to get out of 'expensive ' workplace pensions as they think 'SIPPs' must be cheaper, but it is not always the case and needs careful checking.
For example Aviva and SL pensions usually just have one charge for the platform and the investment fund, whilst SIPPs have two separate charges.
Also sometimes there are employer ( and ex employer) discounts that are not always immediately obvious from the paperwork.
For example my SL pension has a 1.05 % charge but a 0.65% discount from an employer I left 25 years ago.

'For example Aviva and SL pensions usually just have one charge for the platform and the investment fund, whilst SIPPs have two separate charges'.

Good point, thanks. I need to double check on this!