At least one of my providers did that to me when I asked them to send my data to @henryhtapper at @agewage. Refused to do it and would only send to me to forward on.
— alan chaplin (@achaplin71) February 2, 2022
It is indeed the case that many providers treat client requests as discretionary and chose to ignore or deal with the request as they know best.
Much of the correspondence we have with providers shows a scant regard for either the client or the adviser and this is not surprising.
The GDPR has been interpreted by many companies as a means to prevent the free flow of data, because it is perceived as a means of reducing risk. Providers see the risk of people seeing raw data as a risk to both the provider and the client and assume that advisers will use the data to divorce the two.
Infact the GDPR is about ensuring that people own their own data so that those who control the data are their agents, not the other way round.
The problem of not having a pension dashboard is that there are no clear rules to protect members from the kind of thing mentioned in the tweet.
Putting people in charge of their financial affairs involves empowering them to know what is going on and if there are intermediaries prepared to help people understand their financial products through data analysis, those intermediaries should be supported – especially when they have taken the trouble and expense to be regulated.
Pensions needs a proper data-sharing system in this country. My recent blogs have focussed on the big question of whether we need a dashboard. What we do need is the infrastructure behind it.
