Panorama - Who's taken my pension?
08 October 2010, 12:40 PM
#62
Thats explained fine. Its mostly likely what is known as a Group Personal Pension. Its your individual pension under a group scheme for the payments. It may well be a "stakeholder" pension which means it has to stick to certain rules like a maximum annual charge or 1.5%. The issue with stakeholder is that for an IFA practice its not very cost effective to setup and administer because there is little or no commission involved. Another is that to keep charges low the fund choice is quite limited. We have the process of setting up a stakeholder GPP down to a fine art and have some very large schemes. We get a little drip feed payment which, if being honest, probably doesn't cover the administration costs but we do it anyway.
We are all aware that there is a huge issue with adequate pension provision. All anyone can do is their best in this area and its really a personal choice as to whether its a good thing to do or not. Even if I wasn't in the financial industry I would say being a member of a company scheme is a good idea. Auto enrolment will take that choice away.
We are all aware that there is a huge issue with adequate pension provision. All anyone can do is their best in this area and its really a personal choice as to whether its a good thing to do or not. Even if I wasn't in the financial industry I would say being a member of a company scheme is a good idea. Auto enrolment will take that choice away.
08 October 2010, 01:08 PM
#63
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
let's hope that you've not got many outgoings at 55! One of the many reasons I give em a wide berth 
TX.
08 October 2010, 01:13 PM
#64
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TX.
08 October 2010, 01:16 PM
#65
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The critical illness cover I have cannot be bought now, it's one of the few financial products which was actually worth it. In total so far I've only paid about £10k into it ie £50/month over 17 years but would pay me out close to £300k for illnesses which are now very treatable and should probably mean a near normal life span but at the time weren't.
more fool them if true albeit hard to believe ...TX.
08 October 2010, 01:37 PM
#66
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
So if your 32 and earn £32k your looking at 16% of £32K which is about £430 a month. For pretty much all of us including me this is an impossible ask. I don't put in nearly enough but I'm at least doing something and I'm happy with the restriction imposed - its hard enough for me not to spend my ISA (which is earmarked for my mortgage) and when if I became a HRT payer I'd use my pension to reduce my liability. Like I said, a big aspect of a good adviser is to reduce a clients tax liability to an absolute minimum.
What I will say is that people don't seem to realise just how big the gap is in retirement funding and doing nothing is a big mistake.
I've got a similar index linked critical illness policy but it started at only for £50K. It only costs me about £14 a month and covers nearer £60K now - or something to that effect. It too covers for illnesses that are reasonably easy to treat these days.
I've said it before when CI was mentioned on here before, if you've got I really would think twice before dumping it but its become very expensive.
Last edited by EddScott; 08 October 2010 at 01:48 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post