No, they should form a group of fellow employers, or whatever, and benefit from far lower charges for managing a large fund.
I have a "personal pension" but it is organised by my employer for all employess and has very low managemnt charges as result of their buying power.
MBQ
Half the TCO is fixed costs and will be spent anyway. petrol is well over half of the remainder (source: AA running costs).
MBQ
So I take it you mean it is, nonetheless, with a pension company? That is even better. I'm talking about companies that appear to be their own pension company, about whom we hear that their pension scheme "is in deficit, they took payment holidays in the good times, they now have to pay large amounts in" and so on.
Good. Out of interest, what was their reaction? Did they quickly back down, apologise and beg you to reconsider - or did they arrogantly act as if you were in the wrong?
Actually I don't recall his reaction well apart from the fact it was not an apology. I don't think he said anything. They're probably not programmed to handle this situation ;-)
Just like their not programmed to know about the Sale of Goods Act.
Remember that a lot of them /had/ to take payment holidays because of government legislation.
OK, but the advice that "People should organise their own ensions via a pensions company" is potentially disastrous if done on an
*individual* basis due to the far higher charges that will usually be levied on an individual policy.MBQ
In message , Man at B&Q writes
I transferred my pension fund to a SIPP about ten years ago and never regretted it. I suggested to a colleague that he did the same, but all advice from the appalling Follett is rightfully mistrusted and ignored. I'm pleased to say that my colleague left his pot in the capable hands of EL. Such a fine company.
My fund is administered by an old established stockbroker on a non-discretionary basis. Their charges are transparent at about GPB1000 pa. The ticket yield of their holdings is a healthy eight per cent per year. Dealing charges are minimal because I hardly do any buying and selling. Apart from some PIBS most of the original stock buys were sound.
But don't for god's sake pay a sighted scrap of notice to Follett's advice. What does the bastard know? I urge everyone to ignore him and put their money in company funds over which they have no control. They're bound to outstrip any alternative ideas that the Follett scoundrel has. The chap is a real bounder. The only reason he never sold his mother into white slavery is because he didn't want to make any move that might affect the market value of his grandmother.
JF. Never knowingly unkillfiled.
You see the lunacy under which we labour?
That rule was introduced under a tory government.
I thought it was Maggie?
On Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010 at 10:53:55h +0100, James Follett declared:
But are we ever going to hear "The New Adventures of Angel One and Angel Two?"
I understand that to mean "You see the lunacy under which we work" or "You see the lunacy under which we operate".
Yes, but that would just require them to differentiate between trade and retail customers, not make it illegal to sell to retail customers, surely?
I don't recall suggesting it wasn't. Just confirms the dopeyness of a company running its own pension scheme, as opposed to none or contracting with a pensions co. to provide a service to their employees.
Exactly.
So what? It's still lunacy.
Looks like its already been eroded
In message , J G Miller writes
Good question. I've got the bibles written for a third series but I'm not sure if I own the rights. I have a vague recollection of being paid an obscene amount of money for some rights but I can't recall what they were for. My dear wife keeps jealous tabs on the appalling rubbish I used to write in the 1980, but she's asleep. Jim F
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.