View more on these topics

Nest confirms retirement panel providers

Nest has announced the five providers which will form the scheme’s retirement panel as it looks to build a shopping around process for members.

The panellists are Canada Life, Just Retirement, L&G, Partnership and Reliance Mutual.

Members will be able to choose a retirement income product from the panel or shop around on the open market.

Nest chief executive Tim Jones (pictured) says: “Our panel will enable members to buy a retirement income product if this is appropriate to their needs, even if they have a small pot.

“This demonstrates how we’re designing Nest around our members, enabling many of those new to pension savings to be able to consider buying a retirement income for the first time.”

Money Marketing first revealed Nest’s plan to issue a tender for a retirement panel in January.

The tender, which focussed on offering choice to scheme members with small pension pots, was confirmed on February 11.

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. This is a perfect chance to force people to look around and use the OMO but they have blown it.

    By having a panel client inertia means that people will not seek advice on the best option for them or their spouses (spouse benefits, escalation, capital protection etc).

  2. Surely anyone with a NEST pot under £18k with no other pension fund will just invoke triviality and take the whole as cash blow it all on a new car, expensive holidays etc and fall back on the state for their pension thus self defeating the whole idea of NEST

    Or are NEST saying that members won’t be allowed to commute their small pots under triviality?

  3. I agree with Sean yet another nail in the coffin of advice for the masses.

    With this spur to “self-select”, as encouraged by the Government, these people are much more likely to follow the path of minimum resistance (whether it be default provider, execution only or price comparison websites) and therefore miss out on discussions which would result in the best option.

    Give people a choice between a “free” and simple service and one which has a cost but obvious benefit and the fools will choose the former every time.

    I despair!

  4. So to the three posters above, do you believe they should have offered NO annuity and insisted on OMO being the only option whether it was for £1,500 or significantly more.
    That would have required a change in the legislation as currently to offer a pension in the accumulation stage, you have to offer an annuity. Skandia however, not wanting to be in the annuity market offer L&Gs if a client does not want to take advice.

    I think a wide panel for the consumer to choose form without advice is only fair. It then means we have to earn our crust convincing the individual that OMO may be the right thing and even if it is NOT (which if teh rate from one of these 5 is best may be the case), then the OMO is just a part of retirement planning or the decumulation phase of life.
    I could see why someone specialising in annuities might be very worried at this development though and for this reason, anon or pseodoname posts need to be considered in the light of absence of any idea why the individual is expressing certain opinion.

  5. Dermot Brannigan 23rd June 2011 at 11:12 am

    You beat me to it, Phil. Some people will just complain about anything.

    What I’d like to know is how were these providers chosen? Was it based on their ability to pay a large wodge of cash for the privilege?

    Really good news about Just Retirement and Partnership being on the list, as I believe many of NEST’s ‘target market’ will qualify for enhanced annuities

Leave a comment