Post Office Staff Superannuation Scheme vs LGPS?

Pigman

I left the Post Office with some 20 years pensionable service and was at that time on a salary of £32k pa. I am now in a job that gives me membership of the LGPS and am on a salary of about £27k (don't ask why I chose to drop, it'll take too long to explain lol).

Anyway, I think I know the answer to this, but should I leave my Post Office pension where it is (it pays out when I'm 60, not 65 as per my LGPS) or look to transfer it to the LGPS and consolidate all my pension arrangements into the one scheme?

I think its a bit of a no-brainer really, but just wanted to check with "the experts"

dasherman

Keep the Post Office scheme where it is! You will almost certainly get more when retirement comes a knocking.

Retired_I.F.A.

If you get the transfer value fom the post office scheme talk to an IFA who is qualified in the field of pension transfers he can get a transfer value analysis done that will compare all your transfer options not just the two schemes but also possible transfers to a personal pension/s and a section 32 buy out bond and compile a report specific to your aims and needs.

EdInvestor

Retired_I.F.A. wrote: »

If you get the transfer value fom the post office scheme talk to an IFA who is qualified in the field of pension transfers he can get a transfer value analysis done that will compare all your transfer options not just the two schemes but also possible transfers to a personal pension/s and a section 32 buy out bond and compile a report specific to your aims and needs.

The suggestion in bold would in most cases be regarded as mis-selling and would not get a recommendation from a currently employed IFA. Transfers of most final salary schemes to personal pensions were covered in the Pensions Misselling Review in the 1990s and resulted in redress payments to the poicyholders.

Retired_I.F.A.

Absolute cobblers Ed as always.

seven-day-weekend

I wish Retired IFA would be a little more polite when giving different advice than Edinvestor. It is not a good example to those who want to post on the site.

Anyway, I know from my own experience in Town Planning that once you are retired (I've been gone 3.5 years), you very quickly lose touch with current legislation and any information you give may be out of date. So maybe Edinvestor has got it right and it's Retired IFA who is wrong.

Anyway, speaking from a layman's pov, I personally would not dream of putting my final salary scheme pension into a personal pension. I am not a gambler. However, some people are, but I think they should be warned that if they do this it is quite high risk.

Retired_I.F.A.

I'll be polite when she stops posting what she knows to be lies.

Here's some facts I defy anyone to prove wrong.

1/
It would not be automatically regarded as misselling today and could well be the best option.

2/
It could be recommended by an IFA today just as it may not be.

3/
All pension sales were reviewed in the 90's, some were missold but the majority were fine. (I don't know the figures but for example the one firm I worked for in the review had 5000+ pension sales 2 of which were missales)

4/
There are risks in leaving a final salary scheme in its preserved status as there are risks in transferring it.

5/
To not look into the options available and consider only a preserved pension or the benefits of transferring it to another final salary scheme is akin to looking at the form book on only 2 of 4 horses in a race in which you must bet on one.

6/
Many thousands of people have transfered into money purchase plans and bettered their lot.

I'd like to add 7/ Ed is an idiot but we'd need a doctor to prove it.

EdInvestor

The main thing that has happened in this area since Retired IFA departed the industry is the establishment in 2005 of the Pension protection Fund.

This removed the vast majority of risk from deferred final salary pensions for all but the very highest paid people - full compensation is limited to pensions of c.30k a year.

http://www.pensionprotectionfund.org.uk/index/protecting_peoples_pensions.htm


So while there might be the odd fat cat around who would benefit from a transfer, in the vast majority of cases, the risks of moving an f/s pension are greatly outweighed by the risks of leaving it where it is.Which is why in most cases you won't get a recommendation from an IFA, without which providers will not accept a transfer.

EdInvestor

Retired_I.F.A. wrote: »

All pension sales were reviewed in the 90's, some were missold but the majority were fine. (I don't know the figures but for example the one firm I worked for in the review had 5000+ pension sales 2 of which were missales)

A report of the end of the first phase of the Pensions misselling review is here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/your_money/176568.stm


And here's what the FSA said about the Pension Review:

1. The personal pensions mis-selling review is aimed at people wrongly sold personal pensions between 29 April 1988 and 30 June 1994. Mis-selling occurred when people who would have been financially better off at retirement in their employers pension scheme were advised to leave or not to join their employers scheme, or where they transferred pension benefits from a previous employers scheme and took out a personal pension plan instead.
2. The FSAs estimate of the total number of potentially reviewable phase 2 cases is 2,076,000.
3. The phase 2 review population compares with a priority review population of 700,000. To date, nearly 400,000 of these investors have been offered redress. Redress offered and accepted (excluding the value of unconditional offers of reinstatement and benefit guarantees) amounts to over 3 billion

So about a third of the way through the review, IFAs and providers had already paid out over 3 billion pounds in compensation and those thought to have been victimised were in the millions.

Why does Retired IFA find it so hard to believe that modern IFAs and pension providers (who were in addition heavily fined for their misselling activities) do not want to go through this experience again?

Or perhaps he was one of those mentioned who dragged their feet and refused to pay up and were heavily criticised in parliament (see BBC story above)?

I think we should be told. :mad:

Retired_I.F.A.

Q1 I dont.
Q2 I was not.

Are they simple enough answers for you? You twist everything so much Ed I've come to the conclusion it's not worth explaining anything to you in anything other than one liners.