Thousands of savers who gave up valuable final-salary pension benefits did so after consulting financial advisers who knew they would only get paid if they recommended a pension transfer, new data from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the City regulator, reveals. The figures will increase the pressure on the FCA to explain why it took so long to outlaw a controversial charging model despite warnings it was fuelling the mis-selling of pension transfers.
In October, the FCA announced advisers would no longer be allowed to charge contingent fees when giving advice on transfers. Such fees are only payable if the saver ultimately decides to transfer their pension savings, prompting concerns that many advisers were recommending such transfers simply to get paid – despite a widespread consensus that giving up final-salary occupational pensions scheme benefits, which are guaranteed, does not make sense for the vast majority of people.
MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Nowhere to turn
Those caught out by the scandal have limited recourse to redress. Reversing the transfer is unlikely to be possible, leaving savers with no alternative but to pursue their advisers for compensation, either directly or through the Financial Ombudsman Service. However, there is some concern about advisers who have since gone out of business, especially since the regulator’s data shows some were not properly insured. That would leave savers with nowhere to turn.
For its part, the FCA consistently refused to ban contingent fees in 2018 and 2019 because it said there was insufficient evidence that the practice was leading to poor advice. The regulator has always been concerned that many savers are uncomfortable with the idea of paying for advice upfront, particularly if that advice turns out to be that they are better off doing nothing.
In the end, however, the FCA felt compelled to act against contingent charging, given its prevalence and the large numbers of people giving up final-salary pension benefits despite repeated warnings they were likely to be worse off as a result. The regulator conceded the practice meant advisers had a clear conflict of interest.
-
London Stock Exchange gets go-ahead to run Pisces private stock marketThe Pisces market will allow investors to buy and sell shares in private companies. But how will it work, when will it launch, and who is allowed to use it?
-
Could landlords face National Insurance on rental income?The Treasury is said to be considering a tax increase for landlords in an attempt to boost revenue in Rachel Reeves’s Autumn Budget
-
Why is Britain's industrial base crumbling?Opinion More and more factories in the UK are closing, and the government doesn’t seem to care. What’s going on?
-
Scotland's former first minister Nicola Sturgeon leaves behind a toxic legacyOn the left, Nicola Sturgeon is seen as something of a political hero. That makes sense… but only if you exclude her actual record in office
-
Fifty years of investment fiascos – a few examples to learn fromA benign market backdrop over the past 50 years has not prevented recurrent routs, says Max King
-
How to use SAYE and SIP schemes to multiply your moneyEmployers’ savings or share-incentive plans like SAYE and SIP schemes can help top up your pension
-
Just Group has the wind behind it – should you invest?Just Group, a retirement products provider, is well placed to profit from a growing annuity market
-
Why strong currency is the key to upward mobilityChange your social status and your life by saving money in strong currencies, says Dominic Frisby
-
Flex first, fix later: a hybrid retirement strategy to considerYou needn’t choose between income drawdown and an annuity in retirement. What is a “flex first, fix later” approach?
-
A new wealth tax is a terrible idea. The rich are already being hit by sneaky taxes – Merryn Somerset WebbOpinion Ideologues want to squeeze more tax out of the rich with a wealth tax. They’re already wrung dry, says Merryn Somerset Webb
