What next for B&B savers and borrowers?

It is business as usual for depositors and other customers of Bradford & Bingley (B&B), who need have no concerns about the safety of their money.

That was the message from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) yesterday as it stepped in to help the 2.5m B&B customers  after the bank failed to meet its regulatory requirements and the FSA declared the bank in default. 

The FSCS is contributing some £14bn to enable retail deposits held in B&B, and which are covered by the compensation scheme, to be transferred to their new owner, Abbey, which in turn is owned by the Spanish bank, Banco Santander.

FSCS chief executive, Loretta Minghella, said: “This initiative means that some 2.5m people can rest assured that their money is safe and they will not lose it because of the problems at Bradford & Bingley. They can access their accounts in the normal way and it is business as usual for them.”

This effectively means that B&B depositors will have 100 per cent of their savings protected, because the FSA and FSCS have arranged for a smooth transfer of their accounts to Abbey.

Normally, when a UK authorised bank fails,  only the first £35,000 is covered by the FSCS.

So you should make sure you spread your money across different savings institutions (that are not all part of the same group) so that your money is protected.

For instance, if Banco Santander were now to fail and you had accounts with B&B, as well as with Abbey and Cahoot (all owned and authorised under the Banco Santander name), you would  only be covered for the first £35,000 of total savings held with these three brand names, not £35,000 for each.

For borrowers, although existing B&B mortgages will continue to run as they are for the time being, once a mortgage deal comes to an end, it is likely that you will be required to move elsewhere or pay the bank’s prevailing standard variable rate which will almost certainly be higher.

Those with buy-to-let mortgages may have difficulty re-mortgaging elsewhere as a large number of lenders have withdrawn from the market. For example, three lenders previously funded by the now defunct Lehmann Brothers have ceased lending.

For shareholders, the outlook is even worse. There is little prospect of them receiving anything and B&B staff with holdings  in the bank’s SAYE scheme and pension plan will be particularly hard hit.

All of which serves to prove the old maxim that you shouldn’t put all your eggs in one basket.

For more on the FSCS visit:
www.fscs.org.uk

For the top instant access savings accounts visit:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/savings-accounts/instant-access-accounts.aspx
Top cash ISAs:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/savings-accounts/cash-isas.aspx
Top term accounts
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/savings-accounts/term-accounts.aspx
TOp notice accounts
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/savings-accounts/notice-savings-accounts.aspx
TOp children’s savings accounts:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/savings-accounts/childrens-accounts.aspx

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Will workers strike to protect their pensions?

Nearly a third of small company businessmen expect to downgrade their existing pension schemes when the Government introduces personal accounts in 2012, according to a survey by the Association of Consulting Acturies published last week.

Personal accounts are the government’s remedy for the estimated 10 million individuals who are failing to save for retirement. The Government-sponsored scheme will involve anyone who works for an employer being automatically enrolled into a personal account or into the company pension scheme if this matches, or is superior to, personal accounts.

Personal accounts will involve workers paying 4 per cent of their wages into the scheme, employers 3 per cent and the Government 1 per cent in the form of tax relief, making the total contribution per worker 8 per cent.

Although employees will be automatically enrolled into personal accounts, anyone who doesn’t want to be in the scheme can choose to opt out, but workers will have to make a deliberate decision to remove themselves  from the scheme, rather than not joining it (which is the case at the moment).

About 31 per cent of businesses employing up to 250 staff have said they will either reduce their scheme benefits following the launch of personal accounts or ditch their existing scheme altogether in favour of personal accounts because they will be cheaper.

This would be a disaster for pension provision as, according to the National Association of Pension Funds, the average employer contribution to defined contribution (money purchase)  schemes is currently 6.4 per cent and for defined benefit schemes (final salary), 15 per cent.

But employers fear the cost of maintaining their existing arrangements will soar if most of their employees decide to join. Currently, employers benefit from the fact that 51.5 per cent of  the workers don’t join company pensions schemes for various reasons, such as ineligibility or not wanting to pay the monthly contributions.

To date, workers have only  gone on strike over the reduction or loss of final salary benefits.

It will be interesting to see whether workers will strike over the loss of defined contribution benefits come 2012, if employers carry out their threat to switch to personal accounts.

Check out how much your pension fund will buy you in the form of an annuity:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions.aspx

Confused about pensions? Read our guide to company schemes:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions/company-pensions.aspx

Want to know more about personal pensions?
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions/personal-pensions.aspx

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Adviser news round up - August 2008

Adviser news round up

Personal accounts dominated the news in August as the Government announced that its research into the effect of means testing on personal accounts showed that individuals with less than 20 years until retirement in 2012 and earning up to £25,000, will see hardly any benefit from personal accounts.

Individuals in these circumstances would see returns of between only 1-3 per cent greater than if they did not save in the scheme. Someone on £10,000 a year, after 20 years of auto-enrolment in a personal account, paying 4 per cent of earnings each month, would be only £2 better off a week, according to the DWP figures.

Industry experts seized on the figures as proof that low earners in this position would be better off saving in an ISA, savings gateway or simply paying off debt rather than being automatically opted into Government’s new flagship scheme which is due to start in 2012.

Scottish Life, head of pensions, Steve Bee said that improving the basic state pension would be a far more cost efficient way of achieving a decent replacement rate of 84 per cent, than personal accounts which might provide a replacement rate of 92 per cent, but at a cost of savings over 40 years.

Standard Life’s John Lawson attacked the DWP for abandoning its discussions with pension providers about an acceptable quality test for existing pension schemes in 2012, but a spokesperson for Aegon insisted that the talks were ongoing.

The solution put forward by a number of trade bodies, including the Association of British Insurers, would have allowed employers to certify that the majority of their employees would be as well, or better off, under their existing pension arrangements than they would be in personal accounts.

Such a test would allow schemes to continue using their existing definitions of pensionable earnings and would only require companies to review their pension arrangements against personal accounts every three years.

Failure to agree would mean that employers would have to measure contributions to their existing schemes against what would be required under personal accounts, and in the event of a shortfall, reconcile any differences through top-up payments.

There was also concern over the future of Qrops in the wake of HMRC striking off three Singaporean Qrops from its permitted list and some expatriate advisers warned of a potential mis-selling scandal.

Elsewhere, the FSA is to delay publication of its feedback report on the RDR discussion paper until November 2008 (previously due in October) to allow its recently appointed MD of retail markets, Jon Pain, to settle into his new role.

Following the upsurge in cases of mortgage fraud, the FSA said it is considering regulating every individual mortgage broker and making all IFAs giving mortgage advice subject a separate approved person status for mortgages.

The extra cost of bank regulation in the wake of the Northern Rock debacle means that the FSA might exceed its budget this year and the industry could face fee rises in 2009 and 2010.

The ‘treating customers fairly’ regime came under attack from Nick Prettejohn, chairman of the Financial Services Practitioner Panel, who said it was taking up too much of the FSA’s resources.

Elsewhere, a Standard Life survey showed that nearly 70 per cent of advisers believe they can achieve a diploma standard qualification within three years and 83 per cent within five years.

In a sign that investors are diversifying their investments, the IMA said nearly half of total net return fund sales in Q2 2008 were attributable to fund of funds, while tracker funds saw a net outflow of £700,000.

Norwich Union said it is looking to enter the variable annuity market, following similar announcements from AXA and Standard Life.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Time to review protected rights funds

From 1 October 2008, it will be possible to incorporate ‘protected rights’ funds into a Sipp and invest the money as you wish.

Currently, the investment of protected rights within Sipps is heavily restricted and even where a Sipp provider accepts protected rights money, the funds can usually only be invested in cash, bonds and insured funds and the funds normally have to be kept ringfenced from the rest of your Sipp.

You may have protected rights funds if you have opted out of the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme (Serps, now known as S2P) at any time since 1988 and set up a personal pension to invest the National Insurance rebates and incentives offered by the government to do so. 

Between £75 and £100bn of protected rights are believed to be held in personal pensions and a further £250bn in final salary schemes.

Protected rights could constitute up to 40 per cent of your pension fund - a significant amount of money which could be consolidated within a Sipp, making the administration and management of your pension much easier and possibly generating cost savings too.

Tom McPhail of IFA firm Hargreaves Lansdown says: “The ability to invest protected rights money within Sipps from 1 October is all about investment freedom and the facility for people to take control of their funds.

“For instance, if protected rights money is currently invested in a poorly performing insurance company managed fund, you could, for instance, move it into a top performing unit or investment trust, ETF, shares, property, bonds or any other investment permitted by your Sipp provider.”

Another benefit is that protected rights can be put into income draw down (now known as Unsecured Income). However, if you are married and want to buy an annuity before 2012, you must use your protected rights money to purchase a spouse’s annuity as well. After 2012, this restriction will be lifted.

Contracting out via money purchase pensions will be abolished from 2012 anyway, so now may be a good time to think about what you want to do.

For more on Sipps, read our guide:

http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions/compare-sipps/guide-to-sipps.aspx

Visit www.sippsupermarket.com

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Mixing and matching the answer to retirement flexibility

A  host of ‘third way’ retirement products and US-style variable annuities have been launched in the UK over the last two years, driven by historically low annuity rates and a desire for greater financial flexibility in retirement.

The players include The Hartford, Lincoln National, Met Life, Living Time (AIG), Canada Life, Aegon/Scottish Equitable and the Prudential. Standard Life and Axa are expected to enter the market later this year.

Most of the new products fall somewhere between annuities and Unsecured Pensions - the latter being a form of  income drawdown, the facility to keep your pension fund invested in the stockmarket, while drawing an income, instead of buying an annuity.

The US-style variable annuities involve an insurer providing a minimum guaranteed income for life which can  ratchet up if the underlying funds rise in value.

This sounds great in theory, but guarantees come at a cost and this has been the main criticism of the new wave of ‘third way’ retirement products.

The guarantee will only benefit you if your fund would otherwise have been exhausted by withdrawals and/or falling stockmarkets before you die.

Insurers offering these products that you are far more likely to outlive your assets than you realise and that the cost of the guarantee represents good value.

Many financial advisers, however, beg to differ, saying that the present roster of products are too expensive to be worthwhile to pensioners.

Research from Fidelity conducted in October 2007 appears to support this view. Fidelity calculated that the probability of a 65 year old man exhausting his capital by the time he reaches age 95 is almost one in 16.

This assumes that he withdraws 5 per cent from a £50,000 fund with a 1 per cent annual management charge and is invested  50/50 in bonds and equities. By adding on a 1 per cent charge for a guarantee, the probability of the fund being exhausted increases to one in five.

But a 65 year old may not live to age 95 anyway. When a 65 year old’s life expectancy is factored in, the odds lengthen to a one in 50 chance, but only if he was not paying for a guarantee throughout the term of the product.

So while these third way products are a welcome innovation, they need further refinement before they become attractive to those reaching retirement today.

Retirees can secure similar guarantees and flexibility by mixing and matching their pension fund and savings via a mix of annuities (with profit, unit-linked, index-linked and so on) and Unsecured Pension (an Alternatively Secured Pension after age 75).

This strategy avoids having to pay for costly guarantees and leaves the retiree with greater flexibility to cope with changing circumstances, such as death of a spouse and the need for nursing care in their final years.

For more on your options at retirement, read the Defaqto guides:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions/your-options-at-retirement.aspx
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions/your-options-at-retirement/guide-your-options-retirement.aspx

Try out the Defaqto Annuity Calculator:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions.aspx
 

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Beware pitfalls of transferring your pension abroad

For the growing horde of emigrating Brits, the facility to transfer one’s pension abroad  may look attractive, but could be fraught with pitfalls for the unwary.

Since 2004, UK migrants have been able to move their pensions to foreign schemes without the UK scheme incurring an ‘unauthorised payment charge.’

This is only possible if the scheme is on HM Revenue & Customs’ list of qualified Recognised Overseas Pension Schemes (QROPS). (http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pensionschemes/qrops.pdf)

This is a list of QROPS that have consented to have their details published (not all QROPS will necessarily feature within it) and HMRC says it is not to be taken as a recommendation for a particular scheme or product.

The list is updated twice a month, with new QROPS added or rogue ones removed, as was the case recently when three Singaporean schemes fell foul of HMRC’s rules.

HMRC spokesman Patrick O’Brien says: “QROPS are only for genuine migrants who have gone to live abroad permanently and who have already resided overseas for at least  five years when the transfer takes place.

“We are scrutinising these schemes very carefully to ensure that people are not using them as a tax dodge to get their hands on their entire pension in one go. We found that some schemes in Singapore were breaking the rules so they have been removed from the list. It is up to an individual and their adviser to sort this out as they knew what the rules were when they did this.”

To pass muster with HMRC, the receiving pension scheme must confirm that at least 70 per cent of the fund will be used to provide the planholder with a lifelong income in retirement and that the money cannot be taken out before the member is at least age 50.

The attractions of this are obvious. Some foreign pension schemes enable you to withdraw large of chunks of your pension at one time and for the balance to be passed to family and heirs free of tax when you die.

For anyone still living in the UK or who has only left the UK recently, HMRC will only allow transfers to schemes that run along the same pension rules as in the UK.

Financial advisers have expressed caution about these schemes and are wary about advising on them because of the risk of a scheme’s qualifying status being removed after a transfer has taken place. Transfers can also be expensive, possibly incurring an initial charge of 6 per cent and an annual charge  of 2.5 per cent.

Jason Witcombe, an IFA at Evolve Financial Planning said: “It sounds great, but if I were advising on one, I would do my research very carefully. There could be a problem with people trying to have their cake and eat it. I would probably refer it to someone specialising in this area.”

Try out Defaqto Annuity calculator to see what income your fund will buy:
http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions.aspx

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Adviser news round up

 The debate over the Retail Distribution Review continued apace with Whitechurch chief executive, Kean Seager, predicting it could kill off up to 20 per cent of the intermediary market.
 
Skandia supported a split between advice and sales but that is should be applied across the whole of the financial services market.  Sesame called for advisers planning to retire in the next 10 years to be relieved of the requirement to achieve diploma equivalent qualifications.
 
Aegon chief executive, Otto Thoresen, branded the RDR as too complex and that the industry was trying to deal with too many things at once.
 
But change could be in the offing as new FSA chairman, Adair Turner, described the RDR as ‘ongoing,’ and that he would also scrutinise the TCF requirements when he takes up his new post in September.
 
Amanda Bowe is to step down from her role as FSA head of RDR after the feedback statement is published in October.
 
Elsewhere, HBOS claimed the FSA did not know what form ‘management information’ should take by the March deadline for firms to have Treating Customer Fairly procedures in place and AIFA said the FSA would have difficulty in proving the cost/benefit of the TCF initiative.
 
Meanwhile, the Government said the Personal Accounts Delivery Authority (PADA) would be given significant state funding, with only a long term objective to become self funding.  It said this was justifiable on the grounds that the scheme would have to accept workers whom commercial pension providers would find unviable.
 
But in a backdown on its original proposals, PADA said employers will be able to use their existing methods of calculating pay when working out whether they will be exempt from placing employees into personal accounts from 2012.
 
The row over delays by insurers in making annuity payments rumbled on, with some firms calling for the worst offenders to be named and shamed.
 
Living Time marketing director, Dave Harris, called for the open market option (OMO) to be the default option for people buying annuities nd urged IFAs to spurn annuity commission when clients purchased one from their existing provider without advice.
 
Retirement Partnership managing director, Steve Lewis, suggested that insurers should inform pension investors of the OMO facility five years before retirement. Meanwhile the ABI is considering cigarette packet style warnings on pension marketing material as a way to encourage greater uptake of the facility to shop around.
 
Elsewhere, AIFA said it believed the FSA was considering bringing in a 15-year long stop for customer complaints, despite the RDR interim report erring against it.
 
There was much excitement about the business opportunities presented by the easing of the protected rights self investment rules from 1 October, with industry experts predicting a boom in Sipp business.  There’s  an estimated £100bn sitting in personal pension protected rights and a further £250bn in contracted-out final salary schemes.
 
But the new rules will only apply to Sipps and not SSASs and Scottish Widows expressed concern that those in low cost pensions might be mis-advised to transfer into Sipps.
 
Elsewhere, Fitch Ratings predicted that early entrants to the variable annuity market could be the big winners as this new form of annuity could become a quasi-replacement for with profits.
 
The trade press unearthed past legal skirmishes that Dolly and Brian Pickering of IFA firm, Heather Moor & Edgecomb, have had with the FSA and the Appeal Court.  Only weeks ago, the couple were hailed as IFA champions for refusing to pay FOS fees for four customer complaints which were not upheld by the Ombudsman.
 
Meanwhile, Clerical Medical did a swift U-turn on its cancellation of trail commission where advisers were not offering ongoing service. Elsewhere, industry experts predicted a fall-off in mortgage procuration fees.
 
A survey by MetLife showed that two thirds of IFAs’ clients were seeking different ways of planning for retirement as a result of stock market volatility.
 
The Parliamentary Ombudsman at long last recommended that Equitable Life policyholders should receive compensation for losses, with late joiners expected to be the most likely to benefit from any lifeboat fund.
 
 

 

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Drawdown investors consider annuitisation as income falls

Pensioners who opted to take income drawdown at retirement, rather than purchasing an annuity, could face a sharp drop in their monthly income as a result of recent stockmarket falls.

Income drawdown is the facility to draw a monthly income from your pension fund while it remains invested in the stockmarket and has been favoured by those with large pension funds wishing to retain control over them while in retirement.

But it is a risky strategy and only recommended for those who have assets, other than their pension, to live off.

This is because the income you can take each year under an income drawdown plan is limited by the taxman to between zero and 120 per cent of what a standard annuity would pay you for your age until age 75. 

The amount is re-set every five years when your plan must be reviewed by a specially qualified financial adviser.

Recent stockmarket falls are  prompting many drawdown investors to switch from drawdown to annuities because they have seen the reduced level of income they would be locked into for the next five years following a five yearly review.

Those who are worst hit are those who have been taking the maximum permitted income. For example, if the annuity rate for a 65 year old man is 7.5 per cent, you could take a maximum of 120 per cent of this, or 9 per cent.

Assuming a £100,000 fund, that would give you an annual income of £9,000, but if the fund dropped 20 per cent to £80,000,  your annual income would fall to £7,800 (9 per cent of £80,000).

In addition, if you continued taking the maximum allowed, your fund could become depleted, particularly if the underlying investments continued to perform poorly.

This is why advisers recommend that pensioners don’t take the maximum income allowed, so that they have some leeway in the event of equities falling in value.

 If stockmarkets improve over the next year, you can always ask for a review before your next five yearly one, although your adviser will charge an extra fee for this.

If you can’t stomach further stockmarket volatility or you are approaching age 75 (when income drawdown can’t be taken any more and you have to switch to an Alternatively Secured Pension or buy an annuity), now may be the time to annuitise.

Billy Burrows of The Retirement Partnership says: “The current market conditions show just how risky drawdown can be, particularly for those taking maximum income.  But the good news is that  annuity rates have been increasing since the beginning of this year as a result of rising bond yields.”

Defaqto pensions principal, Matt Ward, says: “Given the well publicised fact that people are living longer, allied to the current volatility of the investment markets, there is a potential danger that the income drawdown pot will not be able to sustain the client’s retirement needs. If the client is not comfortable with the risks involved, their financial adviser may need to consider sacrificing the flexibility of income drawdown with the stability of an annuity, or appraise the suitability of the new breed of unit-linked guaranteed facilities.”

To see how much your pension fund would buy you, visit our Annuity Calculator:

http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions.aspx

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Tax refund change set to hit pensioners and higher rate taxpayers

Pensioners, non working spouses and higher rate taxpayers are all likely to be among the individuals to be hit by the Revenue’s move to shorten the time limit for tax refunds from six years to four.

Many elderly people could be left unable to reclaim hundreds of pounds of tax deducted at source from savings income and annuities, while higher rate taxpayers who are members of  company pension schemes, may be unable to claim the extra 20 per cent tax relief due on their pension contributions.

Cuurrently individuals can reclaim overpaid tax going back six years to the 2002-03 tax year. But as part of the Finance Bill currently going through Parliament, this time limit will be reduced to four years from 2010.

Many older people and those on PAYE often have their tax affairs reviewed only every few years and therefore may discover too late that they are eligible to  make a reclaim for overpaid tax or claim a tax relief. 

Retired and non-working spouses often find they have paid too much tax because of the banks’  requirement to deduct 20 per cent income tax at source on  savings interest. If your total annual income is less than your tax free personal allowance, you can register to receive interest gross by completing form R85.

But this isn’t possible if your income exceeds your personal allowance, in which case the bank or building society will deduct 20 per cent income tax automatically on all your savings interest, even if your circumstances change during the tax year.

This means that savers entitled to the 10 per cent tax band, which has been retained for certain low income groups, will have to make a reclaim for overpaid tax at a later date.

Higher rate taxpayers contributing to company pensions often assume that the higher rate tax relief which is payable on pension contributions is recouped by their pension scheme and added to their pension fund automatically. But this isn’t the case.

All pension contributions (whether to a company scheme or to any form of personal pension) are paid net of 20 per cent income tax.   Higher rate taxpayers need to reclaim the remaining 20 per cent tax relief they are entitled to via their self assessment tax returns.

Any overpaid tax will then be refunded, either by raising their tax- free allowance through PAYE (if employed), or used to reduce your tax bill, if you are self employed.

Employees who are higher rate taxpayers and who opt to pay their company pension contributions via salary sacrfice, don’t have to worry about this. Their contributions are paid gross, directly from their employer to the pension provider, so their pension funds benefit from higher rate tax relief automatically.

STOP PRESS: Self employed individuals who owe tax need to get their tax bills paid today if they want to avoid swingeing penalties and fines. The deadline foor second payments on account for the  2007-08 tax year is midnight on Thursday 31 July.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Postcode annuities may penalise healthy pensioners

It’s all change in the once sleepy world of annuities. And before you yawn with boredom, be aware that you may well have to buy one yourself, whether you like it or not.

This is because three quarters of final salary (defined benefit) schemes are now shut to new employees and more workers belong to group personal pensions or have some form of individual personal pension arrangement, such as a stakeholder or Sipp.

All these types of personal  pension require you to buy an annuity with your pension fund when you come to retire (unless you decide to do income drawdown instead, but that’s another story).

The cost of buying an annuity has soared over the last 15 years, as bond yields have fallen and longevity has increased.

In addition, whereas most insurers used to assess annuitants’ likely life expectancy based on gender, age and marital status, the business of rating how long someone is going to live is now a much more sophisticated.

This is because the difference in lifespans in different parts of the UK is quite stark. People living in Glasgow, for instance, have the shortest likely lifespans for anywhere in the UK, whereas men living in West Dorset have the longest.

Hence, the shift to what is known as ‘postcode annuities’ whereby insurers look at geographical, as well as health and socio-economic, factors when estimating life expectancy.

The idea is that if you live in an area with a history of people dying early, the insurer will pay you a higher annuity income because you are likely to die much sooner than someone living in a ‘long life’ hotspot,  such as Bridport in Dorset.

There are also strong correlations between blue collar workers living in the north of the UK and shorter life expectancy, and wealthy white collar employees in the south and longer life expectancy.

Norwich Union is to follow Legal & General and to start using postcode annuities from September this year. Annuitants will be divided into nine groups based on geographical life expectancy, with those with the shortest life expectancy receiving up to 2 per cent more than those with the longest expected lifespans.

NU admits that this will mean that around 30 per cent of ‘healthy annuitants’ will be worse off.

Defaqto pensions principal Matt Ward says: “This development is yet another sign that annuity rates are moving towards an individual pricing basis. The onus for consumers who view annuities as their preferred method for translating retirement savings into retirement income is to shop around to find the best annuity rate in the market for their individual circumstances, whether this be through their smoker status, health outlook or postcode.”   

Currently only one in three individuals approaching retirement bothers to seek out the best rate in the annuity market by using what is called “the open market option” - or the right to shop around, to you and me.

By doing so, you could obtain up to 16 per cent more than the standard rate if you are a smoker, and up to 30 per cent more if you have a life threatening illness or medical condition.

It is best to use an Independent Finacial Adviser when looking to purchase an annuity as it is a complex business and once you have bought an annuity you can’t change your mind afterwards. 

It really is a ’once-and-for-all’ decision which will affect your income for the rest of your life.

 You can get an idea of how much your pension fund might buy you  by using the Defaqto Annuity Calculator:http://www.defaqto.com/consumer/pensions.aspx

IFAs specialising in the annuity market include:
http://www.williamburrows.com/
http://www.retirement-partnership.co.uk/
http://www.annuitydirect.co.uk/
http://www.annuity-bureau.co.uk/

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit