Simon Collins: We risk history repeating itself on DB transfers

Let’s hope lessons were learned from the pension review 20 years ago as this time it is senior management on the line

Next month will be my 25th anniversary working in the world of regulatory compliance. While I would like to think the financial services industry has progressed since I started my compliance career, some issues just do not seem to go away. One of growing concern is whether history will repeat itself over the transferring of pension benefits from occupational schemes – and particularly defined benefit schemes – to personal pensions and Sipps.

I do not want to get too alarmist but we should recognise that the passage of time tends to dull the memory.

How many readers can remember the impact the pensions review had on the financial services industry and its clients, given it officially ended almost 20 years ago?

Can we learn from the lessons of the past? The original report into the pensions misselling scandal of the late 1980s and early 1990s did not just conclude the problem was systemic reckless activity by many financial services firms. It also concluded that most firms did not have sufficient evidence to justify the advice they had provided, hence causation assessments demonstrated that suitability could not be proved.

Back in the day, there were a significant number of firms thinking they were genuinely doing the right thing for their clients stuck in schemes facing deficit, coupled with issues such as the Maxwell/Mirror scheme fallout. However, they had failed to document the rationale for their advice well enough. Sadly, I also recall too many firms classifying their clients as “insistent” and taking significant initial commissions without stopping to think about their inherent conflict of interest.

Back in the late 1980s the then government had introduced the personal pension and the ability to opt out of the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme, all in the interests of choice and flexibility for the public. Fast forward 25-plus years and pension freedoms have liberated the consumer, with their pension pot having become a far more mobile asset. Can the industry prevent itself from repeating history this time around?

I sincerely hope it can, given the positive strides taken over recent years, with the focus on conduct and the improvements firms have made to their governance structures, training and provision of suitable advice, as appears to have been evidenced following the feedback from the FCA’s suitability review (accepting there still remains room for further improvement).

However, it requires a mindset from firms’ senior management that poses questions of its approach. Would you not seriously challenge a customer who wishes to act contrary to your professional advice and politely decline to act? It also requires firms to look at their charging structures when advising customers.

Mifid II will introduce prevention of conflicts rather than trying to manage a conflict, such as where your fee may be contingent on a customer effecting the transfer and your independence potentially compromised.

One further point to consider is this: who is the individual providing the sign-off within the firm for implementing their pension transfer proposition?

The senior managers regime, to be implemented next year, will mean for any firm involved in the pension transfer market – be it provider, platform, intermediary, or wealth manager – the focus will be on individual accountability.

Twenty years ago, too many firms were fined by then regulator, the Personal Investment Authority, for pensions review failings. This time around it will be senior individuals very much in the FCA line of sight if a pension freedoms problem materialises.

Simon Collins is managing director, regulatory, at Eversheds Sutherland

Recommended

Pensions
1

DB transfer demand up as more consumers accept quotes

Data from pensions administrators Xafinity suggests that the proportion of those deciding to transfer their defined benefit pension after receiving a quote has increased. Figures from a sample of firms Xafinity works with shows that during the first quarter of 2016, 562 transfer quotes were requested. This nearly doubled to 958 for the first three […]

FSCS-Piggy-Bank-500x320.jpg
1

FSCS puts bust pension transfer advisers into default

Two advice firms that conducted pension transfers through the same introducer have been declared in default by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Shropshire-based Financial Page and Merseyside firm Henderson Carter Associates both had appointed representative relationships with London lead generator Hennessy Jones, according to the FCA’s register. Both firms were told by the FCA to […]

FCA building FCA fees
2

FCA to publish consultation on DB transfer rules

The FCA is to consult on its rules around advising on defined benefit transfers. Having released several guidance notes on DB transfers since the pension freedoms, the regulator has decided to issue a paper covering potential rule changes to advice on safeguarded benefits, including DB to defined contribution transfers, in the coming months. In the […]

Pot Follows Member – or does it?

One of the perceived problems with pensions Auto-Enrolment was the number of small pension “pots” that would be created given that the average UK worker changes employer many times throughout their career. In the early stages of the Auto-Enrolment project this was deemed to be a major challenge, and therefore the previous Minister set in […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I’ve kept at arms length from this on purpose and refer any enquiries to a specialist outsider on a fee basis. When the proverbial hits the fan I look forward to huge FSCS levies to bail out the feckless greedy and unscrupulous as well as the inept regulator who can only close doors after horses have bolted.

  2. I am involved in DB transfers. However, only transact cases whereby there are genuine reasons for clients who alao have mitigating circumstances.

    We are at the end of the DB schemes as we know them. Everyone should set their own pensions up without any cross subsidies. Period……..

  3. James Hurdman 3rd May 2017 at 2:31 pm

    Anecdotal evidence admittedly, but I received a “concierge” enquiry from Unbiased the other day and its contents lead me to believe that most advisers are pretty cautious about this topic, and that lessons have been learned from the past. The enquiry was as per below:

    “I have a two pension plans totalling £32000 which have GAR,I want to withdraw draw them on my 55 birthday, as they are over £30000 and sun life have sent me a safeguard certificate to be signed after having advice from a financial advisor, i have spoken to at least 20+advisors and nobody is willing too give advice and sign it. thanks”

  4. Can’t see why 20+ advisers would object to providing advice to this chap. More likely they refused to profide advice for next to nothing. If you gather the facts, analyise his situation and provide a report advising him not to cash in the GAR pensions, you can sign his letter and he can toddle back to Sun Life who will deal with him directly. I suspect the fee the advisers are quoting to do the job properly is what is putting him off 🙂

Leave a comment