Skip to main content
Personal Finance Professional – setting standards and guiding the profession - return to the homepage Personal Finance Professional logo
  • Search
  • Visit Personal Finance Professional on Instagram
  • Personal Finance Professional on Twitter
  • Visit @PersonalFinanceSociety on Facebook
Visit the website of the Chartered Insurance Institute Logo of the Chartered Insurance Institute

Main navigation

  • Home
  • News
  • News analysis
  • Features
  • Study room
  • Opinion
  • PFS Radio
  • Digital magazine
Quick links:
  • Home
  • Personal Finance Professional Issues
  • SPRING 2019
News analysis

DB transfers - what next?

Share on
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print
Open-access content Saturday 24th August 2019 — updated 3.52pm, Tuesday 6th October 2020
web_p32-33_PFP-Rory_P_Portrait.png

Rory Percival examines the supervisory work that the FCA has been undertaking on DB transfers and speculates about what will happen next

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has been looking at the defined benefit (DB) transfer market since 2015 and has undertaken extensive supervisory work. It is now on its fourth round of thematic work in this high-priority area. It has published two supervision updates in relation to its work and findings.  

2017 update

In October 2017, the FCA published its findings from early supervisory work. It undertook a desk-based review of 22 firms, reviewed files from 13 and undertook visits to 12. Subsequently, four firms chose to stop advising on DB transfers. This usually occurs when the FCA suggests this to the firm because it has significant cause for concern.

web_p32-33_table-1.png

As part of this work, it undertook 88 file reviews, with the findings as follows:

These figures compare unfavourably with the results from the Assessing Suitability Review (the representative review of the market in 2015), where 91% were found to be suitable. The main findings related to situations where the DB transfer advice was outsourced to a third-party specialist firm. The key problems were:

  • A lack of information-sharing between the introducing firm and the specialist transfer firm, hence the specialist firm did not have enough information about the client’s objectives, needs and personal circumstances
  • The transfer specialist made a recommendation without knowing where the transfer proceeds would ultimately be invested
  • Inadequate specialist transfer or compliance resources to deal with the increased number of referrals.  

web_p32-33_table-2.png

2018 update

In December 2018, the FCA published a further update and the tone of this appears to show frustration that standards had not improved adequately. It had undertaken a desk-based assessment of 45 firms and then visited 18. It appears that the 18 firms were a combination of firms with significant levels of DB transfer cases and those where the desk-based review had highlighted concerns. The file review findings are therefore not representative of the market as a whole:

Following these assessments, a further two firms voluntarily ceased providing pension transfer advice and a further two surrendered their pension transfer advice permissions.

The problem areas are listed in the notice and anyone involved with DB transfers should read these in detail. This is because the failings are extensive and generally very basic in nature, such as: inadequate detail about the clients’ personal circumstances and objectives; failure to consider alternative ways of meeting the clients’ objectives; and failure to manage trade-offs, among many others.  

2019 focus

Towards the end of 2018, the FCA sent out a data request to all firms with DB transfer permissions on business undertaken since 2015. This is to build a market-wide view. It will also allow the FCA to target firms where there are indicators that there may be issues. For example, it has asked about the numbers of cases where the solution costs more than 1.5% pa (excluding adviser charges), so it may target firms where there are significant numbers of more expensive pensions.

Also, it may focus on firms that have seen a significant spike in DB transfer cases. There are a number of other areas that may provide indicators. This will allow the FCA to focus on potential problem firms during the course of this year.  

The future

However, the FCA, at some point, needs to stop undertaking supervisory work on DB transfers; it cannot go on indefinitely. But it cannot stop unless standards have improved adequately – and we are not seeing much sign of this currently, certainly not if you look at the issues found in the December 2018 notice. To know if the market has improved adequately, it needs to know what the market – on average – is doing. It will not achieve this by focusing on the riskier firms highlighted by the data request, as these will not be representative of the market as a whole. To get an average market view, the FCA will need to review cases selected more randomly.

The FCA has stated that it will be undertaking Assessing Suitability Review 2 (ASR2) in 2019, making an assessment from all investment and pension cases in 2018. This will be a market view and I suspect the FCA may increase the proportion of DB transfer cases in this review, to achieve adequate numbers to take a view on the DB transfer market.

But even here there is a problem. ASR2 will look at 2018 cases and the policy development only took effect during the course of 2018, mainly in October, so there will not be a chance for the full effect to play into advice. Hence, I suspect the FCA will undertake further, random, DB transfer work in the latter half of 2019 or early part of 2020, on early 2019 cases, or alternatively defer ASR2 to look at early 2019 cases, to be able to obtain comfort that standards have improved adequately.

In conclusion, if standards do not improve significantly now, then FCA work on DB transfers will continue through 2020, into 2021 and maybe longer, and we may also see further policy changes.

Rory Percival of Rory Percival Training & Consultancy

SPRING 2019
This article appeared in our SPRING 2019 issue of Personal Finance Professional .
Click here to view this issue

You may also be interested in...

web_p12-13_files_iStock-187958292.png

What's on the radar?

News from the FCA and more
Saturday 24th August 2019
Open-access content
web_p34-35_puzzle_alamy_EYCMXB_ext.png

How to be dementia friendly

What changes businesses need to make to be more dementia-friendly
Saturday 24th August 2019
Open-access content
web_p38-39_idea__ikon_11920294.png

Big questions needing big calls

A look at the challenges surrounding technology in the financial services sector for 2019
Saturday 24th August 2019
Open-access content
web_p40-41_social-media_iStock-513313726_ext.png

Let's get social

A look at the latest PFS developments on social media
Saturday 24th August 2019
Open-access content
web_p44_supplies_iStock-477706476.png

Education for the nation

How to start the financial conversation with students across the U
Saturday 24th August 2019
Open-access content
Alt

Planning for the road ahead

A look at planning with relevant life policies and EGLPs
Saturday 24th August 2019
Open-access content
Filed in
News analysis
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

BECOME A MEMBER

BECOME A MEMBER

SUBSCRIBE TO PRINT

SUBSCRIBE TO PRINT
PFP
​
FOLLOW US
Twitter
LinkedIn
Youtube
CONTACT US
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7880 6200
Email
Advertise with us
​

About the PFS

About us
Membership
Qualifications
Events

PFP magazine

Digital magazine
Podcasts
Blog
News

General Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy
Think Green

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Write for PFP Magazine
Want to receive PFP Magazine
Not a member but interested in knowing more? Click here.

© 2023 • PFP Magazine is published by Redactive Media Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ