Pensions - Articles - Huge variations how firms triage pension transfer enquiries


A survey of almost 400 financial advisers by mutual insurer Royal London has found huge variations in the way firms carry out an initial ‘triage’ process when clients ask about pension transfers. But the FCA’s plans to tighten practice around triage could lead to adverse customer outcomes according to Royal London policy director, Steve Webb.

 The firm is calling for a ‘safe harbour’ where advisers can use their experience and judgment to give an initial view to clients, potentially saving them thousands of pounds in advice fees where there is a strong likelihood of a recommendation not to transfer.

 In March 2018, the FCA published a consultation paper on ‘Improving the quality of pension transfer advice’. In it, they raised concerns that initial ‘triage’ processes whereby advises give an initial steer to clients about a transfer inquiry could cross the boundary into regulated advice. The FCA is encouraging advisers to make sure that any initial response is purely ‘generic’ and educational and not specific to the client’s individual circumstances.

 In response, Royal London undertook a survey of advisers in June 2018 which asked advisers active in the DB to DC transfer market a series of questions about how they ‘triage’ clients who inquire about pension transfers. Questions included:

 Do you operate an initial ‘triage’ service for people inquiring about DB to DC transfers?
 If YES, can you briefly describe the process

 What percentage of those approaching you about transfers:
 Are ‘triaged’ at an early stage and do not take matters further
 Go on to take advice and are recommended not to transfer
 Go on to take advice and are recommended to transfer?

 Will the FCA’s proposals on triage improve member outcomes?
 The responses indicated a huge variation in how firms approach the idea of triaging clients. Key results were:

 More than two thirds of advice firms operate an initial ‘triage’ process when approached about a potential transfer. But what this means in practice varies hugely. When asked ‘what percentage of clients are triaged and do not then take things further’, replies ranged from ‘NIL’ to ‘over 90%’.

 In some cases, firms started from a strong presumption against transfers and actively sought to discourage clients. Comments included:
 “We do a high level assessment to see if their requirements are ‘rational’”
 “We do it over the phone to weed out ‘timewasters’”
 “If they are cautious, it’s a definite no, and if ‘for wrong reasons’ definite no”
 “They are thoroughly grilled as to their reasons”

 Some firms undertook quite extensive and personalised analysis, all as part of what they saw as a ‘triage’ process. Examples included:
 ‘We undertake TVAS and spreadsheets to look at Critical Yield’
 ‘Full interview’
 ‘Full examination of client’s finances, attitude to risk, reasons for transfer etc.’
 ‘Questionnaire, cash flow modelling’;

 At the other end of the scale, other firms were very careful to do nothing that could be construed as personalised advice:
 ‘we have an informal chat about generic pros and cons’

 It’s a discussion on general issues then we send the Royal London ‘five good reasons’ guide
 ‘a quick educational conversation’

 In terms of the FCA’s proposal that advisers should be much more careful about crossing the line into advice when undertaking triage, advisers were split as to whether this would be a good idea. Although a majority supported the proposal, around 1 in 3 advisers thought that consumers could lose out if rules around triage were tightened up.

 Commenting on the survey and on the FCA’s plans, Royal London policy director Steve Webb said:
 “Our survey revealed a huge variation in adviser practice, with some advisers having a very general initial conversation with clients and others doing extensive personalised analysis, whilst still seeing this as part of a triage process. So it is understandable that the FCA is looking to provide greater clarity and standardisation in this area.

 “But there is a risk if the FCA clampdown makes advisers afraid to offer an initial triage process. For some clients it is clearly not going to be in their interests to spend a large amount of money only to be told that transferring is not a good idea. The FCA needs to provide a ‘safe harbour’ for advisers which would allow them to have such a conversation with a client at an early stage, without putting themselves at regulatory or legal risk”.
  

Back to Index


Similar News to this Story

Retirement Income Riddle hits consumer health and wellbeing
Older people in the UK are facing a ‘Retirement Income Riddle’ that is leaving them more dissatisfied and depressed in retirement, new research by Leg
GMP equalisation judgement poses new challenges
Aon has said that while it believes insurers can cope with the flood of requests likely to emerge as a result of the recent judgment on GMP equalisati
102 pages in two minutes on tier 3 employers in the LGPS
Aon released their report commissioned by the Scheme Advisory Board, identifying potential issues surrounding the participation of Tier 3 employers in

Site Search

Exact   Any  

Latest Actuarial Jobs

Actuarial Login

Email
Password
 Jobseeker    Client
Reminder Logon

APA Sponsors

Actuarial Jobs & News Feeds

Jobs RSS News RSS

WikiActuary

Be the first to contribute to our definitive actuarial reference forum. Built by actuaries for actuaries.