One of the insistent themes that emerged from the two days of conference I have been at in Scotland is the collapse of the trustee as a representative figure of the member (and worker). This may be because a great part of the “DB Strategic Summit 2025” has been considering the Councillors who take the role in the LGPS, representing both the various workers (members) and employers who pay the bulk of the contributions.
It may be because the large firms of professional trustees who have so taken over when it comes to “new trustees” of DB schemes, were not represented among the trustees.
But whatever the reason, many of the panel discussions touched upon the “fiduciary responsibility” and questioned whether fiduciary duty was now more conflicted by the absence of trustees nominated by members (in the private sector). It became clear that the trustees who were of the “old school” believing their role was to stand between the member and employer, were not comfortable about the takeover of “house views” from a small number of trustee companies. These were several times referred to as causing “conflicts of interest”.
Professional have hit upon the headline of the report which you can download here
Or read here
In case the reader is intimidated by this takeover of professionals , they should know that LCP’s glowing assessment of the situation is endorsed by all the professional, legislative and regulatory bodies
This year we are pleased to have 18 PT firms participating in our survey – our largest number yet – alongside perspectives from The Pensions Regulator (TPR), the Association of Professional Pension Trustees (APPT), the Association of Member Nominated Trustees (AMNT) and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
Bringing together these insights into our Sole Mates 2025 report, which highlights how trusteeship is entering “A Whole New World” of steady growth, sharper regulation and stronger governance.
The vestiges of amateur incompetence and even sharp practice are being replaced by this “whole new world”. But let us find out who the winners are! This is hinted at by Professional Pensions but not stated,
The report is quite meaty and the best read is at the end but I know you want to know who are the winners so let me release you with the killer charts , here and now.
Less than half of UK DB and DC schemes are without a professional trustee and this figure is probably distorted away from professional trustees by small schemes and derelict schemes unable to appoint professional trustees or unwilling for budgetary reasons. Many will head for the PPF if backed by a weak covenant and DB and consolidation if they read anything about pensions or talk to TPR. Where there are meaningful conversations between employer and trustees about the “end-game” , expect to see a professional trustee at the centre of it.
You have to go deep into the report to see where the action is happening and none of the firms who chose to be in the survey declared a loss in numbers, most continued to grow at a less frantic rate than 2024 but it’s interesting to see who has the investment in them to spurt and the answer is most!
When it comes to beauty parades, Dalriada, ICG, Vidett and Capital Cranfield are the winners with over 50% of the wins of the 17 companies going to them. This is nice for the marketing departments but doesn’t tell us who boss professional pensions, that comes from the next chart.
Of those 50% + of schemes using professional trustees nearly 80% are with Law Deb. , ICG, Capital Cranfield and BESTrustees. These are the firms with a history in the game though there are other aggressively growing behind them/
This is not the time to go into detail about all the firms in question, that is a job for further surveys but these professional firms are increasingly operating with firm house views, they are talked of as having a bias and winning mandates to suit particular requirements, most usually around the “end-game”.
It would be wrong to throw stones. But I suspect that the ownership of these firms is no longer the traditional partnership but instead private equity and the management of these firms is fixed firmly in risk reduction. It is unfair of me to say that individual trustees are acting on tight leashes, but they are not coming at the business of trusteeship with open minds, they have pitched their position on pensions
I suspect that the strength of professional trustees, especially those offering sole trustee corporate trusteeship is nothing if not determined – and determined by the firm they represent. This year LCP include among schemes with a corporate trustees with schemes with multiple corporate trustees. There is development!
The conference I was at was for another kind of trustee and LGPS Councillor and it was refreshing to remember it still exists, it is possible to forget!