Clerical Medical - Loss in pension value?

dunstonh

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82092899#Comment_82092899

Clerical Medical closed for new business in July 2009. So, when you bought this plan, there was no option for cash at the end. Annuity was the only option.

So it's unlikely that at the time of purchase, your current objective was the objective then.

DRS1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82093060#Comment_82093060

I think when the OP first started talking about cash he was talking about the 25% TFLS as opposed to taking the whole pension as a one off cash sum.

dunstonh

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82093077#Comment_82093077

Possibly, but he still would have annuitised the other 75%.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4266203.pdf

DRS1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82093113#Comment_82093113

Yes but I think his point may be that while annuity rates and bond capital values may offset each other the fall in the overall value of the pension pot will impact on the TFLS which is 25% of that value. He would only be "completely" OK if he annuitised 100%.

I must admit I don't know how the CM lifestyling works but I assume that at least some of the pension would have still been invested in equities which would have made up for some of the bond losses. I know that helped me out when I did my own ham fisted version of lifestyling between 2019 and 2024.

SouthCarolina1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82092979#Comment_82092979

Many were lazy/blinkered until a loss hits them/us in the face! Wonder if there is a gathering of complainants. Or do we just accept the loss.

SouthCarolina1

Wonder if there is a gathering of complainants. Or do we just accept the loss.

QrizB

Wonder if there is a gathering of complainants.

I'm not sure who you'd complain to, though?

Your complaint is essentially "I didn't manage my pension in a way to meet my retirement goals, and I also didn't engage a professional FA/IFA to manage it on my behalf".

dunstonh

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82093903#Comment_82093903

I posted a complaints response earlier, and it was rejected. It would be hard to see how a complaint could be upheld. The availability of drawdown and options like UFPLS was very limited prior to 2016. Whilst theoretically possible, Pre-2016, the FCA had a stance on drawdown suitability that your fund had to be over £100,000 and you needed to have sufficient other means. Consequently, drawdown was only an option for the wealthy. And the vast majority of pension products didn't offer drawdown.

So at the point of sale, there was never a possibility of you doing a drawdown with that pension.

Clerical Medical never gave advice and were not authorised to give advice. So you cannot complain that they didn't give you advice that they had no FCA authorisation to provide.

The bottom line is that any complaint would be assessed on the rules and regs at the point of sale. You bought yours before 2016. So a complaint that pre-2009 they didn't offer you functionality that didn't exist until 2016 isn't going anywhere. You were free to change that pension, either the investments within it or transfer it to an alternative but you chose not to. You had an objective, but it appears you didn't check your product met that objective or employ a financial advisor who would have advised you of what needed to be done to meet that objective.

The bottom line is that when you DIY, you take on responsibility. If you want to outsource that decision making and suitability checking, then you need to employ an advisor. The product provider is just a manufacturer of products. They do not tell you what is best for you. That is for you to decide or for your financial advisor to advise you.

Marcon

Many were lazy/blinkered until a loss hits them/us in the face! Wonder if there is a gathering of complainants. Or do we just accept the loss.

You've described the situation perfectly and with great honesty. People failed to take any interest, never mind action, until it was too late for them to do anything to ensure their fund choices targeted their objectives, or engage an adviser to help them make the active choices necessary to help reach those goals.

Complainants can 'gather' all they like, and as many as they like, but it won't change the fact that it was their own inaction/inertia that has given rise to their wailing and gnashing of teeth.

You keep referring to ' the loss' without ever recognising that where a loss (real or imaginary) occurs, and the person(s) claiming to be suffering the loss were responsible for it, they aren't going to find a scapegoat - let alone one which is culpable.

Aylesbury_Duck

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82093910#Comment_82093910

What is this "loss" you keep mentioning? To quantify any loss you need to show what your pension would have been worth had you made a different choice of fund. Given that you seem to admit to being lazy/blinkered when you started this pension, it doesn't sound credible that you would have made a proactive choice. On that basis, there is no comparison to be had, and certainly no way of knowing whether any loss (or gain) was made.

Put yourself back in time and presented with the fund options. Which would you have chosen back then, and why? Be honest, you aren't able to know what's happened to those funds since, so you'd have to rely upon the description of the fund's aims, how it is invested, what risk profile it has, and what it's performance had been in the years preceding your choice.

There's a chance your choice would have performed worse than the default fund you're in. If that were the case, I suspect you wouldn't be clamouring to hand money back to the pension provider.