Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Outlook: Pensions

Tuesday 20 October 1998 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

ON TOP of the big daddy pensions mis-selling scandal, a lesser, baby outbreak of mis-selling in the insurance industry has come to light - that of free standing additional voluntary contributions (FSAVCs), which, unbelievably, continued at many life offices even after the daddy scandal was unmasked.

FSAVCs allow you to top up your pension with additional monies when you can afford it. The life assurance marketing men were selling them like topsy in the early to mid 1990s, often on terms which were not as good as could have been obtained through ordinary company pension schemes.

The industry has agreed that a small proportion of these people should be compensated - those where Inland Revenue rules were broken or where there could have been a matching contribution from the employer had the company pension scheme been used in preference to an outside provider. By the time the Financial Services Authority has finished investigating, it seems certain compensation will be paid to a great deal more.

Compensation is one thing, but what about prevention? So far the response has been to pile on the regulation and hope the industry has learned its lesson. Prudential, one of the worst offenders in mis-selling, is trying to change its culture by switching away from commission.

Sales people are becoming farmers rather than hunters, in that they are rewarded for growing business rather than getting it. This is plainly a step in the right direction and is more likely to yield results than any amount of regulation.

However, the complexity of the savings market - its lack of transparency, its interaction with the tax system and investment alternatives - remains the biggest barrier to a fair deal for consumers. Simplifying the market, rather than regulating it, should be the priority.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in