Nissan pension scheme

Status
Not open for further replies.
joemcdokes said:
I’ve just had a look at an article about that although I don’t fully understand it, it’s a positive not a negative but it doesn’t start till after this proposed change will start.
Click to expand...

Banning contingent charging is a negative thing for me. It will price so many normal people out of advice as they’ll need to now pay whether they transfer or not and will also potentially need to pay from savings and not direct from the pension pot. It’s terrible in fact. We opposed the ban from the start alongside a number of other large financial institutions but the FCA have not listened.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Shirley Shammel said:
Banning contingent charging is a negative thing for me. It will price so many normal people out of advice as they’ll need to now pay whether they transfer or not and will also potentially need to pay from savings and not direct from the pension pot. It’s terrible in fact. We opposed the ban from the start alongside a number of other large financial institutions but the FCA have not listened.
Click to expand...
What’s the rationale behind changing it? Was it open to abuse, too expensive, not competitive etc. ?
 
Goat Eyes said:
What’s the rationale behind changing it? Was it open to abuse, too expensive, not competitive etc. ?
Click to expand...

They argued that it was skewed towards giving unsuitable advice as the adviser only gets paid if the transfer goes ahead so they argued that clients were being encouraged to transfer when perhaps not suitable to do so so advisers got paid.

The reality of the situation is that if you have stringent compliance procedures in place that would never happen. Mainly because you are on the hook for the advice if there was ever a complaint so compliance departments - certainly in our case - have to sign off everything as suitable before it’s transferred anyway.

Once again it’s the few rogues and pension scammers who spoil it for everyone else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shirley Shammel said:
They argued that it was skewed towards giving unsuitable advice as the adviser only gets paid if the transfer goes ahead so they argued that clients were being encouraged to transfer when perhaps not suitable to do so so advisers got paid.

The reality of the situation is that if you have stringent compliance procedures in place that would never happen. Mainly because you are on the hook for the advice if there was ever a complaint so compliance departments - certainly in our case - have to sign off everything as suitable before it’s transferred anyway.

Once again it’s the few rogues and pension scammers who spoil it for everyone else.
Click to expand...

If it doesn’t start till October and the scheme is scheduled to end in September how is it relevant, I don’t get it.
Can you explain?
 
joemcdokes said:
If it doesn’t start till October and the scheme is scheduled to end in September how is it relevant, I don’t get it.
Can you explain?
Click to expand...

If the scheme ends in September then by the time it goes deferred there won’t be enough time to request CETV’s and provide financial advice before the ban begins in October. It’s usually impossible to transfer a defined benefit pension in 4 weeks due to the timescales involved in doing this type of work. Transfer advice can also only be given to deferred members not active members. An active member is only provided with an “indicative transfer value” not a real transfer value. Once the ban begins in October anyone wanting advice will therefore now have to pay for it whether they transfer or not (with some caveats like abridged advice being available and the ban potentially not applying to those in poor health or financial hardship). Contingent charging is where a fee only applies if the transfer goes ahead. Your typical Nissan workers won’t be in a position to fork out £3/4/5k for transfer advice from their bank acccounts so in my view it will stop many people from getting advice and cause a huge advice gap. The FCA have really fucked up here in my view.

If the scheme provided everyone with a full CETV on the day it closes plus all relevant scheme information it may be possible to provide advice in a shorter time scale however.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shirley Shammel said:
If the scheme ends in September then by the time it goes deferred there won’t be enough time to request CETV’s and provide financial advice before the ban begins in October. It’s usually impossible to transfer a defined benefit pension in 4 weeks due to the timescales involved in doing this type of work. Transfer advice can also only be given to deferred members not active members. An active member is only provided with an “indicative transfer value” not a real transfer value. Once the ban begins in October anyone wanting advice will therefore now have to pay for it whether they transfer or not (with some caveats like abridged advice being available and the ban potentially not applying to those in poor health or financial hardship). Contingent charging is where a fee only applies if the transfer goes ahead. Your typical Nissan workers won’t be in a position to fork out £3/4/5k for transfer advice from their bank acccounts so in my view it will stop many people from getting advice and cause a huge advice gap. The FCA have really fucked up here in my view.

If the scheme provided everyone with a full CETV on the day it closes plus all relevant scheme information it may be possible to provide advice in a shorter time scale however.
Click to expand...
You could do it for a couple of hundred quid instead. Can’t be more than a few hours work?
 
Shirley Shammel said:
If the scheme ends in September then by the time it goes deferred there won’t be enough time to request CETV’s and provide financial advice before the ban begins in October. It’s usually impossible to transfer a defined benefit pension in 4 weeks due to the timescales involved in doing this type of work. Transfer advice can also only be given to deferred members not active members. An active member is only provided with an “indicative transfer value” not a real transfer value. Once the ban begins in October anyone wanting advice will therefore now have to pay for it whether they transfer or not (with some caveats like abridged advice being available and the ban potentially not applying to those in poor health or financial hardship). Contingent charging is where a fee only applies if the transfer goes ahead. Your typical Nissan workers won’t be in a position to fork out £3/4/5k for transfer advice from their bank acccounts so in my view it will stop many people from getting advice and cause a huge advice gap. The FCA have really fucked up here in my view.

If the scheme provided everyone with a full CETV on the day it closes plus all relevant scheme information it may be possible to provide advice in a shorter time scale however.
Click to expand...

Until I get a Q's + A's I've nothing here to suggest the pension fund is being transferred.
 
joemcdokes said:
Until I get a Q's + A's I've nothing here to suggest the pension fund is being transferred.
Click to expand...

I never said it’s being transferred. It goes deferred then you could seek transfer advice if you so wish. My points are about deferred members choosing to seek transfer advice.
 
Goat Eyes said:
You could do it for a couple of hundred quid instead. Can’t be more than a few hours work?
Click to expand...

If only. It’s far far longer than that and we’ve also go professional indemnity insurance to pay. The FCA have mentioned a fee of £3,500 being about the median.

Can you see why this is causing an advice gap now? You are saying an adviser should only charge a couple of hundred quid. Ergo you’d never find an adviser. FCA have fucked up.
 
Shirley Shammel said:
If only. It’s far far longer than that and we’ve also go professional indemnity insurance to pay. The FCA have mentioned a fee of £3,500 being about the median.

Can you see why this is causing an advice gap now? You are saying an adviser should only charge a couple of hundred quid. Ergo you’d never find an adviser. FCA have fucked up.
Click to expand...

Probably equates to less than NMW, that’s before writing off years of training/experience and professional qualifications.
 
joemcdokes said:
You also mentioned Nissan workers not just deferred members.
I wish I'd not read it now. :lol:
Click to expand...

If the Nissan scheme “ends” in September everyone who is in it becomes a deferred member. It just means you are no longer an ACTIVE member of the scheme.
 
Shirley Shammel said:
If only. It’s far far longer than that and we’ve also go professional indemnity insurance to pay. The FCA have mentioned a fee of £3,500 being about the median.

Can you see why this is causing an advice gap now? You are saying an adviser should only charge a couple of hundred quid. Ergo you’d never find an adviser. FCA have fucked up.
Click to expand...
I was just pulling your leg. I’m in an industry that is heavily regulated by the FCA and whilst they do a lot of good, sometimes they impede the process.

This could also present an opportunity too though. An opportunity to offer a payment plan to pay the fee, this could attract interest and be a regulated agreement. Don’t know if that’s possible.
Pop said:
Probably equates to less than NMW, that’s before writing off years of training/experience and professional qualifications.
Click to expand...
I would doubt that very much.
 
Goat Eyes said:
I was just pulling your leg. I’m in an industry that is heavily regulated by the FCA and whilst they do a lot of good, sometimes they impede the process.

This could also present an opportunity too though. An opportunity to offer a payment plan to pay the fee, this could attract interest and be a regulated agreement. Don’t know if that’s possible.

I would doubt that very much.
Click to expand...

I expect to be inundated with enquiries about this between now and the time of the ban like. From my experience everyone has preferred to take the fee from the pension rather than stump it up from their bank account.
 
Goat Eyes said:
I was just pulling your leg. I’m in an industry that is heavily regulated by the FCA and whilst they do a lot of good, sometimes they impede the process.

This could also present an opportunity too though. An opportunity to offer a payment plan to pay the fee, this could attract interest and be a regulated agreement. Don’t know if that’s possible.

I would doubt that very much.
Click to expand...

Do you know how many hours go into a transfer? You’re also paying for the knowledge the advisor has built up over years, it’s not a case of just filling in a few forms.
 
Pop said:
Do you know how many hours go into a transfer? You’re also paying for the knowledge the advisor has built up over years, it’s not a case of just filling in a few forms.
Click to expand...
Aye but to say it’s less than NMW is ludicrous.
 
Goat Eyes said:
Aye but to say it’s less than NMW is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Genuinely it’s not. Looking at about 3 to 6 weeks from initial contact to get to the point of advice then about another 2 to 4 weeks for it to transfer after advice is given. When a transfer value is provided it’s valid for 3 months to ensure clients are given time to seek advice and consider their options.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top