This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

Equitable Life redress ruling 'unfair'

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

The Government’s decision not to compensate Equitable Life members who annuitised before 1992 was unfair and wrong, according to and Pensions select committee member Andrew Bingham.

In June, the Government began distributing £1.5bn of compensation to those who annuitised after 1992. It chose the cut-off date because before then there was no maladministration in the firm which, if spotted by the regulator, could have affected policyholders’ investment decisions.

But speaking to Money Marketing at the Conservative Party conference last week, High Peak MP Bingham said the 10,000 people who annuitised before the cut-off date should have been included.

He said: “When the vote came through the House of Commons I voted against the Government because I thought the pre-1992 annuitants should have been entitled to compensation. There were a few of us who thought the same, but not enough.

“Even though their losses were not the result of regulatory failure, I think it was unfair and wrong to exclude them. A lot of Equitable Life policyholders feel the Government’s solution is not as they would wish.”

Under the compensation scheme, £620m will go to 37,000 with-profits investors compensating them for relative losses. Two-thirds of the money is expected to be paid out by 2015.

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

Money Marketing Awards 2015
Put your firm forward as the leading practitioner in your field. Adviser and Advertising categories are open to entries - Enter Now.

Readers' comments (2)

  • But surely, those pre-1992 annuitants will have benefited from the extended over paymentson the bonus rates?

    So they have gained on a being over paid on Bonus rates (resulting in a higher fund value) - and so being compensated will mean they will benefit twice and only lose out once (on annuity reductions)?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Oh but Henry (as the Ad goes)

    They don't pay Commission!

    They all deserve what they (don't) get!!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick


Do you see the value in adviser trade bodies?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments