Here is a list of the insurers participating in the ABI’s DC legacy review and the brands under which they provide (or originally provided) DC workplace pensions.

 Abbey Life

 Abbey Life Assurance

 Hill Samuel Life Assurance

 Target Life Assurance

 Admin Re

 ReAssure

 Aegon

 Scottish Equitable PLC

 Aviva

 CGU

 Commercial Union

 General Accident

 Norwich Union

 Provident Mutual

 Royal Scottish Assurance

 BlackRock Life Limited

 BlackRock

 Canada Life

 Equitable Life Assurance Society

 Fidelity Worldwide Investment

 Friends Life

 Friends Provident

 London & Manchester

 National Mutual

 Equity & Law

 Sun Life

 AXA

Winterthur Life

 Colonial Life

 Guardian Financial Services

 HSBC Life (UK) Limited

 Legal & General

 Mobius Life

 NFU Mutual

 The Phoenix Group

 Phoenix Life Limited

 Phoenix Life Assurance Limited

 National Provident Life Limited

 Prudential

 Prudential Assurance Company Limited

 Reliance Mutual

 Criterion Life Assurance

 University Life Assurance Society

 Royal London Group

 Scottish Life

 Royal London Plus

 Royal London (CIS) Limited

 Scottish Widows

 Halifax Financial Services

 Clerical Medical Investment Group

 Standard Life

 Sun Life Financial of Canada

 Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (UK) Limited

 Wesleyan Assurance Society

 Zurich Insurance

 Zurich

 Allied Dunbar

Extensive as this list appears, there are a number of brands (I have sold) that do not appear here,  where is Irish Life, Royal Assurance, Sun Alliance and General Portfolio for instance?

Did they choose not to participate or are they simply hiding behind one of the legacy behemoths -Phoenix, Re-assure and Admin Re.

I think these brands matter, they were integral to the reasons why people brought these products. The majority of these brands promised more than they delivered and the issues involved are issues of trust and breach of promise.

You can read the ABI progress report on the legacy of failure here. It is for the most part a hall of shame.

For the millions of policyholders stuck with life companies languishing in obscurity, the review cannot come quick enough.

It is promised to deliver its findings by December 2014 but don’t hold your breath, the 51 pages of blurb we have here, suggest that this is something the ABI hope to talk out.

Nowhere in the review do we get any sense of engagement with outside stakeholders (the people who sold and bought these policies), instead we have a turgid recitation of the complexities of the task ( a sure precursor of a fudged conclusion over the horizon.

Share Action have called the report “conflicted and ineffective”

Share Action are right on this; the ABI are doing their best to string out this review hoping that the damning verdict of the OFT will be forgotten.

The ABI will be responsible for cracking the whip to providers whose schemes are considered. This progress report suggests the rubbish will be swept under the carpet

The ABI had promised us proper disclosure of transaction costs by June this year– where is the report- what has been done in the 14 months since that promise was made.
The OFT stopped short of referring this matter last summer, in the light what’s happened since, perhaps it should revisit that decision.

A year’s work culminating in an incomplete list of participating insurers gives little hope