• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.

DIY Pensions for a Limited Company?

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #91
    Originally posted by Maslins View Post
    Fair enough

    At the time of transfer all my HL SIPP was cash so hopefully will be a bit easier/quicker. Will note your comments though and keep an eye on it/them!
    Transferring cash is a wise move. HL do not levy a platform fee on cash so they have no incentive to drag out the transfer process like they do with in specie transfers. Your transfer should be much quicker.
    Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
    Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

    Comment


      #92
      Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View Post
      Sorry, I disagree with your analogy. As a non account holder you have full access to the HL website, good as it is. The only thing a non account holder cannot do is trade. I also disagree about using HL for smaller pots. You can get excellent service on a decent platform from Close Bros for about half what HL charge. Other providers are available but I recommend from experience II and Close Bros.
      I'd really love to use II - it's obviously the lowest cost but the service issue worries me. Having potentially hundreds of thousands locked up with no access and no customer service response is not acceptable. Cheap doesn't always equal value. Once I've seen their service improve perhaps.

      The problem is that it really depends on a lot of variables. How often you trade, the cost of trades, if you want a regular trade option, what you want to invest in (some platforms have limited options), the costs of those investments (cheaper on some platforms than others) and so on.
      At the same time it's obvious that a flat fee become a lot better once you have say £100k or more and charges make a big difference to the investment returns eventually.

      I looked at iWeb as an alternative to II but it doesn't allow regular trades. Halifax does allow that but is more expensive to trade. It also has more limited investment options than other platforms.
      Close Brothers looks pretty good up to a certain level but then is a lot more expensive than some others later on.

      Here's that table again, but it's not tailored to your specific requirements.
      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/investin...nvesting-5000/

      Comment


        #93
        Originally posted by Smartie View Post
        I'd really love to use II - it's obviously the lowest cost but the service issue worries me. Having potentially hundreds of thousands locked up with no access and no customer service response is not acceptable. Cheap doesn't always equal value. Once I've seen their service improve perhaps.

        The problem is that it really depends on a lot of variables. How often you trade, the cost of trades, if you want a regular trade option, what you want to invest in (some platforms have limited options), the costs of those investments (cheaper on some platforms than others) and so on.
        At the same time it's obvious that a flat fee become a lot better once you have say £100k or more and charges make a big difference to the investment returns eventually.

        I looked at iWeb as an alternative to II but it doesn't allow regular trades. Halifax does allow that but is more expensive to trade. It also has more limited investment options than other platforms.
        Close Brothers looks pretty good up to a certain level but then is a lot more expensive than some others later on.

        Here's that table again, but it's not tailored to your specific requirements.
        https://www.telegraph.co.uk/investin...nvesting-5000/
        100% agree. What suits me and my family may well not suit others, so DYOR. I use II for my pretty large pot and Close Bros for the more modest pots. It isn't so hard to work out from your own circumstances which is best. My ambition, of course, is that my families pots get to the stage where a move from CB to II makes sense as soon as possible.
        Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
        Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

        Comment


          #94
          Just read through this thread which is very useful and backs up what I've read elsewhere. Just one question I haven't seen in relation to platform fees and that's whether these have to be born as a personal expense or whether they can be paid from the company account.

          I haven't looked at this in detail but it looks like II for instance will take charges from a debit card or from cash in your SIPP account. I just wondered if it's a legitimate expense.

          Comment


            #95
            Over a month since initial transfer out forms were sent to HL I've chased them again. Got the below response:
            "We are currrently waiting for Barnett Waddingham to return their section of our transfer out form. We sent this to them on 19 April. Once this has been received we will be able to transfer your funds."

            No idea who Barnett Waddingham were, so Googled them and it's a firm of actuarial/consultancy service I've had nothing to do with. The funds were all held as cash...how/why does that require an actuarial firm?!

            Comment


              #96
              Originally posted by Maslins View Post
              Over a month since initial transfer out forms were sent to HL I've chased them again. Got the below response:
              "We are currrently waiting for Barnett Waddingham to return their section of our transfer out form. We sent this to them on 19 April. Once this has been received we will be able to transfer your funds."

              No idea who Barnett Waddingham were, so Googled them and it's a firm of actuarial/consultancy service I've had nothing to do with. The funds were all held as cash...how/why does that require an actuarial firm?!
              Ummmm. Check who the SIPP administrators are for the SIPP you are transferring into, it isn't always obvious who does the admin behind the scenes. I'd also keep an eye on HL given my experience of their foot dragging on transfers away from them. You may wonder why HL don't chase the forms up. The reason is simple. They charge you day by day until the final day the transfer is done. Hence it is in their interest to drag it out. Having said that, HL do not charge to hold cash in the SIPP wrapper.
              Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
              Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

              Comment


                #97
                https://www.barnett-waddingham.co.uk...waddingham-ne/

                Seems perhaps it's the Interactive Investor end that's slowing things up...will check with them, see if they got the forms.

                Comment


                  #98
                  Originally posted by Maslins View Post
                  https://www.barnett-waddingham.co.uk...waddingham-ne/

                  Seems perhaps it's the Interactive Investor end that's slowing things up...will check with them, see if they got the forms.
                  I wasn't certain about the new admin company behind the II sipps, but I new it had recently changed. I suspect that several issues are conspiring against you right now. The II takeover of TD Direct, the migration of the combined business to a new platform and the switch of sipp administrators all combining to a perfect storm against you. Bad timing on your part, but all I can say is, yes, keep reminding both sipp companies and sit it out. The swap from HL to II is well worth persisting with.
                  Public Service Posting by the BBC - Bloggs Bulls**t Corp.
                  Officially CUK certified - Thick as f**k.

                  Comment


                    #99
                    I transferred 3 schemes to II two were ok, one was a pita

                    My view, it is very dependent on the paperwork required by the existing plan holder, the people at III seemed unable in one instance to properly complete and forward the required forms direct and end result was a communications failure between them both, it took a while for that to become apparent because they were effectively blaming each other.

                    I began to act as intermediary by hosting a call between both parties and it was then relatively easy to resolve.

                    I like to think the existing plan holder (Towers Watson) in this case was simply being diligent with my funds the Pru on the other hand seemingly couldn't wait to hand that particular pot over!

                    I did find the secure messaging a bit naff at getting to the bottom of things.
                    I did consider alternates such as carrier pigeons or even syrup tins and string as a better method than the secure massaging tool but in the end used the phone instead.
                    Last edited by DallasDad; 14 May 2018, 11:49.
                    So now I am worried, am I being deceived, just how much sugar is really in a spoon full!

                    Comment


                      I have considered switching from HL a number of times and may do so in the future but in the meantime I have switched virtually all investments into ETF index funds and Investment Trusts (not standard managed funds) because they have a limit for both on charges for the year.
                      Yes - II would still be cheaper overall but while I am in HL this is proving a good option.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X