Aegon Pension consolidation

[Vanquish-Storm]

I just use pensionbee to consolidate the various pension's I've accumulated over the years - they only took 10 working days to transfer my AEGON pension.

Capita on the other hand - they can just die as pension holders!

I am looking at using PensionBee to join a couple of small pensions after being made redundant again.

Is it simple enough to use? I just need to check what the charges are compared to what I have already.

 

[Double07]

There is no legal requirement. If there is a requirement it has been put in place by the pension scheme trustees. For example, you can transfer some defined benefit pensions without advice, but very few pension providers are willing to receive the funds unless a positive recommendation to transfer has been made by a financial adviser.

Nobody wants to be on the receiving end of shifting regulatory goal posts when a customer runs out of money in retirement and successfully complains that they didn’t realise that spending all their pension money would mean that they would run out of pension money.

Not strictly true. If the Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV) of a defined benefit pension is more than £30k then you MUST get regulated financial advice. If its a money purchase scheme then you do not require regulated advice but the provider will almost always recommend you do so, for pretty obvious reasons.

There are limits to what you suggest, and also unfortunately you're mistaken. Triviality now only applies to defined benefits schemes, and within the limits and restrictions that apply 75% of the amount will be taxable - it is effectively a UFPLS payment. This has been the case since 2015.

For money purchase, your benefits must be £30,000 or less, and no individual pension worth more than £10,000. You also have to cash them all in within 12 months. Again, 75% of the amount will be taxable. In theory there's no limit of three applied to workplace pensions if you have lots of those, but they're still taxable too. Small pots have been taxable for quite some time now - since around 2013 IIRC.

haha someone on a forum who actually knows what on earth they are talking about What next, a politician answers a difficult question truthfully????

 

[The_Abyss]

Not strictly true. If the Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV) of a defined benefit pension is more than £30k then you MUST get regulated financial advice. If its a money purchase scheme then you do not require regulated advice but the provider will almost always recommend you do so, for pretty obvious reasons.

I think we’re in agreement - I could have been clearer. My last point remains though - many providers will not only require advice but require that advice to be a positive recommendation to transfer, not just a recommendation for their product.

I’d dispute your last point though - there are plenty of providers who’ll happily take money purchase benefits without advice. It is a huge market.

 

[Double07]

I think we’re in agreement - I could have been clearer. My last point remains though - many providers will not only require advice but require that advice to be a positive recommendation to transfer, not just a recommendation for their product.

I’d dispute your last point though - there are plenty of providers who’ll happily take money purchase benefits without advice. It is a huge market.

Agree , although I've seen enough 'transfer advice recommendation' letters from IFAs in my time to realise they aren't worth the paper they are written on, but essential nonetheless. It's amazing how many different, yet equally stupid, ways they can say "Yeah you really shouldn't do this but I've explained the risks and as your fine with them, go right ahead, and where is my commission (sorry advice fee, haha)"

I did say 'recommend you take advice', i.e. cover their own backsides for when you transfer and they really couldn't care less if you have the foggiest idea how a money purchase scheme works

 

[The_Abyss]

I don't think that there are that many IFAs accepting insistent clients any longer, as for the most part they're still responsible for what the client does if they advise them after, such as recommending the investments after allowing the client to proceed. That advice is worth its weight in gold, as it'll mean the adviser is on the hook if things subsequently go south (the rights and wrongs of this can be argued, but that's as it stands today) and means that the client is more likely to qualify for future compensation as a regulated activity has taken place, even if it is the initial unregulated activity that failed.

 

[Double07]

I don't think that there are that many IFAs accepting insistent clients any longer, as for the most part they're still responsible for what the client does if they advise them after, such as recommending the investments after allowing the client to proceed. That advice is worth its weight in gold, as it'll mean the adviser is on the hook if things subsequently go south (the rights and wrongs of this can be argued, but that's as it stands today) and means that the client is more likely to qualify for future compensation as a regulated activity has taken place, even if it is the initial unregulated activity that failed.

I know it's not as bad now but I used to work for the FSCS and it was horrific a few years ago.

 

[booyaka]

I don't think that there are that many IFAs accepting insistent clients any longer, as for the most part they're still responsible for what the client does if they advise them after, such as recommending the investments after allowing the client to proceed. That advice is worth its weight in gold, as it'll mean the adviser is on the hook if things subsequently go south (the rights and wrongs of this can be argued, but that's as it stands today) and means that the client is more likely to qualify for future compensation as a regulated activity has taken place, even if it is the initial unregulated activity that failed.

correct - anyone who has any thoughts to be in the industry over the next few years would stay WELL clear of insistent clients

I know I've turned away five cases in the last few months worth over £2.6million in fund values from "insistent" clients. Problem is that someone they know has maybe released funds/transfer from a DB scheme - I get referred to see their friend/family member who thinks "i'll do the same" - Then when you get the CETV/information etc - it's wholly wrong for them to transfer due to the benefits they have built up being way better than they realise/not advisable etc . Problem is that in their head, they've already started spending the money on the extension/holiday/debt clearing/new car etc and despite my advice to stay put, they insist on wanting to do it.

I've not touched an "insistent" client for probably 5 years now.....It's a cause of a lot of unhappy clients as they just can't understand why I don't want the business, and why they can't do what they want with their money. Some people just don't want to listen to the "correct advice" - they just want the money.

 

[da_mic_1530]

I am looking at using PensionBee to join a couple of small pensions after being made redundant again.

Is it simple enough to use? I just need to check what the charges are compared to what I have already.

Extremely simple, have a look at the website, usually all that they need is

Employment dates
Estimated pension pot
Additional details such as "pension provider - e.g. Aegon / Scottish Widows" and your acc number

 

[Vanquish-Storm]

Extremely simple, have a look at the website, usually all that they need is

Employment dates
Estimated pension pot
Additional details such as "pension provider - e.g. Aegon / Scottish Widows" and your acc number

Just been looking through it seems decent enough, surprised there are not more options similar out there.

 

[Deleted member 77746]

I have 3 pension pots now, need to consolidate them into one myself. I don't like accounts been scatted all over.

 

[DJMK4]

If they are all with the same provider I should just do it through Aegon then rather than a 3rd party