“Yet to buyers” and “propertied pensioners”; we should have the spaces we need

Martin Arnold brings the pensioner together with the first time buyer in this fascinating article.

He is talking in the FT about the work of the FCA, an organisation that is really getting its act together.

It [FCA] also plans to examine how innovative products, such as retirement interest-only mortgages, could help older people raise money against the value of their home or repay an earlier mortgage that is maturing.

Nikhil Rathi, chief executive of the FCA, said in a speech last month that 43 per cent of people were projected not to be saving enough for retirement despite an expected high rate of home ownership.

“How will households meet retirement goals, needs and potential care costs?”

said Rathi.

“Can some of the nation’s £9tn of housing wealth be unlocked more effectively, and put to more productive use, particularly to sustain living standards in later life?”

The FCA said it would launch consultations on its planned rule changes early next year, including measures to encourage artificial intelligence to be used to improve and speed up mortgage advice.

It aims to start making changes by the end of 2026. It will launch a market study to examine

“how the later-life lending market could develop to meet the different needs of future consumers”

including allowing more holistic advice on the range of financial options available to people in retirement.

It’s a question that many younger people will be asking as property remains in the hands of those for whom ownership has no practical value and plenty of liability. The value of property is not going up.

This may seem a good thing for younger people getting on the housing ladder but an ongoing problem when it comes to the properties they want to buy – the leasehold properties – typically flats which have lagged freehold properties in value growth for many years. We need families having the space of large freehold properties, and not to have to live in their parent’s house while saving for what they need.

Recent research by Harry Scoffin of Free Leaseholders suggests that the freehold properties in this country are owned by those of pensionable age and that the failure of these properties to move into the hands of young families is preventing young families from happening – 43% of young couples without children put this down to having no suitable place to afford to buy to bring children up in.

The FCA are quite right to link the problems with property management for pensioners with first time buyers, the property market could become more better for both groups if finance became better available for young and old.

But we also need to confront the problem that faces older people and that is selling out and moving to leasehold properties is not a good bet, especially if you have spent your life moving up not down the property ladder. Moving into a leasehold flat is not a good option for pensioners and we have to do something to give leasehold its good name. It is not a good option for first time buyers either, they are not wanting to buy leasehold flats and the result is a real issue for the FCA.

It is of course a real issue for those who are looking at the financial security of older generations and worrying about the lack of it amongst those much younger. For those of us looking at the issues of pension adequacy, this is a huge problem a generation or two down the line.

“Reforming the mortgage market can help address the fact that as a society we’re saving too little for later life, yet people have huge wealth tied up in property,”  he [Nikhil Rathi] said.

The rules on more flexible products, such as “part-and-part mortgages” on which only some of the loan is repaid before it matures, could be made easier to help more first-time buyers get on the property market.

Other changes being considered by the FCA could help those with variable or lumpy income, such as self-employed people, to get mortgages as well as those who have had bad debts in the past but have since improved their credit rating.

Let’s go back to need of space and where we need to live. The FCA should be encouraging behavior that balances young and old people’s needs .  I see too many youngsters waiting to buy a house for a family and too many pensioners sitting on  freehold property they can’t properly enjoy.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Strata creates Australian property micro-states and teaches the UK lessons!

Last night, I sat and listened to Michael Teys . He talked to us of how Australian’s European founders rejected the UK system of freehold and have built in the past 250 years a system that has much to teach the UK.

It was something to visit the Number one Lecture Room of Kings College. I went , not for the room, but for the lecture on ways Australians structure the ownership of property using its Strata system.

This evening was sponsored by Michael Teys and it is one that has left a lasting impression on me and those who sat with me. I  found myself sitting next to Norma Cohen, a personal hero as a journalist and historian of the 20th Century. This was no ordinary evening lecture.

I was able to walk home to my leasehold flat, knowing the work that is being done by us as Directors of the leaseholder company that has taken some control in the management of our property (though we still struggle with ground rent).

I turned to the subject late at night and woke early to blog, only to find that my words had been better uttered on social media by Joe, a young man I had met earlier. Here is what Joe had to say on what we saw about Australia;  I cannot say it better!

Tonight I attended a fascinating and very timely talk at King’s College London by Michael Teys , one of Australia’s leading strata lawyers, hosted by groundbreaking campaign Free Leaseholders led by the incredible Harry Scoffin .

🇦🇺 inherited English law but flatly rejected the “leasehold” part. “Freehold strata” was the innovative solution, allowing collective ownership of a multi-occupancy building. Something we are missing in 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿.

The key feature is it does away with the role of an absentee landlord collecting ground rent and wielding power over people’s homes. The owners govern and own the property themselves. In 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿, even with a resident management company, leaseholders may govern but they don’t truly own and control.

Today, 15% of Australians live in strata. By 2050, it’s projected to be 50%. Banks lend against it. Developers promote it. Disputes are far rarer than in the 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 leasehold system. It works and has done for decades, exported now across multiple countries.

“Nobody in England and Wales is expecting utopia with Commonhold. They’re asking for something that already exists so they can own and control their own property.”

As someone who has spent the past few years navigating the sharp end of leasehold, this was an inspiring way to end a tough year. There is a solution. People are pushing for it. Commonhold and common sense will prevail!

Thanks to Free Leaseholders and Michael Teys for an excellent evening.
Leasehold Commonhold LeaseholdReform

Teys taught us that Australia has used the Strata system to create micro-states where property rules ensure justice for an increasing number of freeholders. Much for us to learn from.

There is a video to come and I hope that anyone who owns a leasehold in the UK or who have friends and relatives (or both!) will take an interest.

This Government has promised legislation to give power to leaseholders to release them the clasp of freehold.  The power of the Freeholder is what  Norma explained to me as a servitude that is many centuries old.

My mind goes back to history lessons at school and the importance that was explained of owning freehold to voting rights, till 1832 freeholding was the only credential for having a vote.

We have voted this Government in on a promise of reforming property ownership rules and I will be sorry if it fails to get the promised legislation on the parliamentary table before Christmas.

Michael Teys

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

I wouldn’t give my pension to Americans who don’t care about the climate

BlackRock chair Larry Fink. The asset manager retreated from voting on climate change after lawsuits brought by Republican attorneys-general

I  am pleased to see that Dutch pension funds are no longer putting their money with BlackRock now it’s retreated from voting on climate change. Well done Mary McDougall & Co for bringing our attention to it.`

The PME group, which manages €59bn of retirement savings for workers in the metal and technology sectors, said it had “decided to end our relationship with BlackRock” following a months-long review.

There are two views of money at work here. Firstly there is the deal between the scheme managers which may be commercial and then there is the deal done for the members, which is fiduciary and social. The PME group has to be both commercial and social and that means standing behind the principles it has established.

BlackRock have changed their position on voting to align it with American political consensus and the consequence for the Dutch fund manager is to terminate its relationship.

We have had one such example that springs to mind (though there may be other decisions of the same kind taken by pension trustees in conjunction with their advisers). The FT reminds us

In February, the UK-based The People’s Pension pulled £28bn from State Street, saying it was prioritising “sustainability, active stewardship and long-term value creation”.

I have not forgotten. My estimation of People’s Pension went up in February when they announced this and it goes up every time I read such news.

We should be particularly pleased to see American Pension Funds voting off American fund managers who do not comply with instructions.

In late November, New York City’s top finance official Brad Lander recommended that three of the city’s biggest pension funds drop BlackRock as a manager of more than $42bn, as the metropolis looks to use its weight in markets to tackle climate change.

Lander, who will step down as city comptroller at the end of the year, said BlackRock and two other asset managers, Fidelity and PanAgora, had failed “to address climate risk with the seriousness we expect”.

New York has recently made its position on American political behaviour quite clear. Now I read of a top official determining that New York’s City Pension funds should not tolerate capitulation to political interference.

It is not woke to have principles about climate risk and stick to them and I hope that those of us strong minded about this in the UK or Europe, will recognise and support those in America who do not give in to the commercial advantage that can be gained by dong what Government considers commercially to the gain of it and the country.

It cannot be commercially for a country or a Government to see the climate continue to deteriorate. Canada, with a form BOE head Mark Carney at the helm, will have none of that.

Thanks FT for publishing this and laying out the facts in such a way that we can have no doubt how you feel on this.

I wouldn’t give my pension to Americans who don’t care about the climate. I wouldn’t and I won’t and I will pay to remove my money from LGIM if it moves from the mandates I chose for my personal investments. I don’t suppose I will have to, knowing Legal & General. There are of course alternatives if they did!

Posted in pensions | 2 Comments

SASA – (Stagecoach Aberdeen Scheme Adoption) – the video and deck

John Hamilton

If you missed this  coffee morning presentation from John , you are in luck. It’s with you below, with a download if you want to share it – here.

If you want to see the slides they are below and they can be downloaded from this link.

Thanks to all that came and to those who tried but couldn’t get on the call. It was that good I’m going to watch the video now!

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How our pensions are thought of and debated by those who represent us

John Glen – impassioned on pensions in Westminster Hall

How pensions are treated in parliament is set out admirably by William Wright. I cannot remember intensity of debate on pensions like we’re doing and it’s not just around show-pieces like the Budget and the readings of the Pension Schemes Bill. Politics is not everything but it’s a debate by people who represent us. John Glen is MP for Salisbury as well as a former Minister in the Treasury, Richard Tice is outspoken as Reform is; Reform reflects the current mood of more of us than any other party. The Liberals are taking an interest in pensions, I haven’t seen since Steve Webb departed the Chamber in 2016

I do not hear an argument against fiduciary intervention through mandation. Steve Darling, the Liberal spokesperson remarks upon the danger of loss of liberty (a very liberal thought) but I do not get a general aversion to what Bell is proposing in the Bill.

Sometimes we underestimate the notion of ” a nation” and think that what people are saying is what we are told in our conference halls. I am more interested by what is being said in parliament and the extent to which it reflects what ordinary people think.

There are a lot of reasons people have to be angry with what has or hasn’t happened in terms of implementing promises. But I do not think that pensions is an area that ordinary people feel hard done by. It’s the extraordinary people, those with superfluous wealth who have lost out since July 2024.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

What next for what was Scottish Equitable? Will Aegon UK end up more than legacy?

NEXT and WAS don’t go well in the same sentence. Can Aegon really go anywhere but “legacy”?

There are two matters in my mind. The first is how this impacts on Aegon’s clients. Aegon is what became of Scottish Equitable which was , for a while, a very reputable life company in the IFA market. It paid high for its business and IFA’s loved getting up to 150% of Lautro, but it was not to last. Aegon took on the mutual and Aegon has never quite made it in any private pension market. It is not an oh so fashionable bulk annuity or retail pension provider.

It has a master trust but is neither quite there in workplace pensions and will have to eat its personal pensions to get fat enough to make the 2030 and 2035 cuts as Aegon is not winning employers to it as an occupational muti-employer provider. Aegon has disparaged CDC following a bad time with the Dutch version. In short I cannot see Aegon doesn’t have a legacy that clients can reach out to, the glory days of Scottish Equitable are over and no replacement has been found.

The second worry I have for Aegon is , as Gordon Aiken is pointing out, the life company has some very much more dynamic competitors. Lloyds Bank is clearly going to support the lame duck of a master trust it owns with Scottish Widows.  Forcing the Lloyds Bank Staff work pension into its arms without much glee from what I can see from Lloyd’s Bank staff. All the same , it will give Scottish Widows some relevance as a master trust and with Scottish Widows having a huge book of legacy personal pensions, they will not have problems with scale- not with an override at their disposal to move personal pension pots into the master trust.

As for Standard Life and Phoenix, this is a business that appears a bit skint at present but it is the only one to have the capacity to write annuity business. To Standard Life, Aegon will look a legacy business as it moves forward on many fronts, I’m not so sure it’s got the appetite for more of Britain and especially Scotland’s heritage but as mentioned above, it is very good at it.

Is Aegon really the prize I grew up when I started out in the 1980s? What has happened to see it hung out to dry by a company to be named in future TransAmerica?

Are Aegon’s top staff going to hang about a company that has made it known it wants to receive offers by February of next year? The investment business is not coming with the life company and this does not sound a happy company to be travelling with.

Posted in pensions | Leave a comment

Trustee pension consultations fill up the Christmas stocking.

 

It has two months since he announced an imminent consultation on what we should expect from pension trustees. While Torsten Bell has been busy getting a bill through , CDC going and a budget over the line, this document has been sitting idle and it doesn’t arrive with a lot of urgency attaching to it!

Louise was till recently a TPR stalwart and now she leads the way at one of our largest and most dynamic firms of professional trustees , IGG. I suspect there’s a little frustration in this short message to the market! If it’s important to the Torsten Bell DWP it only takes 6 weeks.

So thanks to Professional Pensions for this smorgasbord of ideas which can be fun in the consultation

The DWP said the 2024 Work and Pensions Select Committee DB report and the 2023 independent review by The Pensions Regulator (TPR) both recommended mandatory accreditation for professional trustees, noting it wants to “explore what additional requirements should be placed on professional trustees given the increasingly influential role they play in the UK pension system”.

The consultation also sets out measures to improve the diversity of trustee boards. The DWP said ensuring diversity of thought on trustee boards is a “key pillar of good governance”, noting it wants to explore ways it can bring more diversity, talent and skills to trustee boards, asking what role the government and regulators can play in helping schemes attract a diverse and talented pool of individuals to trusteeship, and whether there should be any limits on the length of trustee appointments.

The consultation also asks whether there is a role of a public independent trustee appointed by TPR to be used where a scheme’s trustees need to be replaced or when TPR is asked to appoint a trustee to an orphan scheme.

Additionally, the consultation asks respondents what they think works well in the current trusteeship and governance system, what the barriers to good trusteeship are, and what further support trustees need looking ahead to 2030 and beyond.

It also looks at whether TPR should have the same levels of regulatory oversight as the Financial Conduct Authority regarding administrators and services and whether administrators should have to be registered with TPR to be involved in administering a scheme. It also asks whether increased consolidation activity poses any risks and how any risks can be mitigated to ensure an orderly transition to pension ‘megafunds’.

APPT has hardly been blown away

Association of Professional Pension Trustees (APPT) chair, Rachel Croft, agreed that trustees need to continue to have the right skills and experience and that to be fully prepared to take schemes forward successfully.  

“We note the important role the paper outlines that professional trustees are playing in this,” she continued.

“We welcome the trustee directory, subject of course to it not being excessively onerous administratively.  We also welcome the questions on accreditation and standards as areas we are already examining and looking at with key stakeholders.

“Administration is also a key consideration for the consultation.  Trustees are well-placed to support the development and improvement of administration services that members receive and professional trustees are playing a key role here.”

However, she said that the APPT had one caveat at this early stage in the consideration of the consultation document: “Naturally, we advise careful consideration of applying any restrictions to appointment numbers or terms, given the need to manage market capacity and encourage the continuation of training and development for professional trustees.”

Change is needed. TPR currently does not have capacity nor authority to regulate pension scheme administration. This strikes me as of first importance to this consultation, most of the local problems people have with pensions come from poor administration.


While this is swimming along , we should be getting a consultation from the Pensions Regulations before Christmas on  a code of practice  for CDC authorisation. I suspect it will look rather like the last one we had in 2022!

I suspect that it will put the trustees at the heart of the authorisation process and I look forward to responding to both.

 

Posted in pensions | 1 Comment

Andrew Smith’s tough questions for John Hamilton of Stagecoach

Andy Smith

Most of the time I have little sympathy for the de-risking brigade who seem to think it their right to walk all over schemes trying to run on. Now one has got away – a big one – and there may be more schemes that will do what Stagecoach and Aberdeen have done.

But this time, I know the de-risker and I like Andrew Smith, even if he is too clever by a half! Here are his questions he thought up on his way to work (yes, really – it’s what actuaries do when travelling on a Monday morning!)

I’m glad Andy Smith has given me some questions to ask John Hamilton at our coffee morning!

You can get to our coffee morning by clicking on this link at 10.30am today (Tuesday)

Posted in pensions | 1 Comment

John Hamilton’s Stagecoach deal – 10 months on from Melton Mowbray!

John and I part at the end of an eventful February day!

In February of this year, I went to Melton Mowbray to hear John Hamilton speak to a  PLSA East Midlands meeting about what needed to happen in this country.

This is a photograph of us late in the day waving from opposite platforms. But it seemed we were on the same journey metaphorically though not literally! He ended north of Perth, I ended in the City of London.

John will  be speaking tomorrow  about what he has done this year to make things grow at Stagecoach and wider!

He will be presenting to our Pension PlayPen coffee morning crowd and you could be one of them. We have a record attendance to break and I suspect John will come close!

You can find a link to tomorrow Tuesday’s  coffee mornings here.


Here’s the advert.

Pension Playpen Logo

Here are some recently presented slides.

They are an update of the set he presented to us at Melton Mowbray. How grateful (he to speak and me to listen) we are for Bob Compton who invited us!  If you want your own copy, you can download the slides on this link

I have posted the link to the coffee morning meeting above and below and hope and here

I hope that we have a way forward for schemes like Stagecoach who want to run on and to do so with either capital backing or the backing of a financially confident employer like Aberdeen.

The call for John to come to this meeting on Tuesday 16th, was made at Tuesday’s meeting where Richard Jones was speaking. I had no doubt that John Hamilton would seize the opportunity if he could. He could!

I want John Hamilton to explain  how he wants – as ongoing Chair of Trustees of Stagecoach – to embrace “innovation, growth”, in finding his purpose.

There are questions asked in this week’s coffee morning which we have shared with John Hamilton with this video. Go to minute 2o minutes for the section where Richard turns to Stagecoach and those at the Coffee Morning ask questions that John will be able to address next Tuesday.

We hope you enjoy it; the debate is an historic document marking the progress we are making.

Yes videos as well as slide decks can be deemed documents!

I am sorry I made no contribution, other than to announce this “document” at the end. I spent a little time with my neurologist who was evaluating my little grey matter.

The work with Aberdeen is some of the most interesting in the DB “endgame” and I hope that before long we can get a spokesperson from Aberdeen to join us. We have one more slot this year.

If you find yourself with something to say at the end of the day, drop me a line at henry@agewage.com or put a comment on the blog. I will pass things on to Steve Goddard who has the keys to the webtool!

To end, here’s tomorrow’s (Tuesday’s) link to hear John and talk with him

https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_MzcxMzYwMmQtMTQ5Zi00M2NmLWEwMDEtMDk4MGQ2YmJhZmEz%40th

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

“No turning back from consistency on pension dashboards” – says Richard Smith

Richard you are right. No turning back now on pension dashboards!

It is of course more than pension dashboard’s consistency that is in question. If the projections for the pension we are going to get for pensions expected from DC pots under the FCA are different from the pensions expected from a TPR pot , what will the saver  make of that? What will anyone reads a paper or googles “how do they work out the pension that I’ll get?”

FC 24/3 is the FCA paper  that starts….

That paper’ consultation finished on the 27th February this year and the closure of work on the dashboard closes on the end of October next year.

The FCA should go live some time after next October, in 2027 we hope very much.

One thing that’s going on now is that consumers who are doing testing – good news on design I hear from Richard and good news from the one person I know who has tried the dashboard on his stuff – Chris Currie. But is this enough testing if “consumers” find that some pots are rolling under TPR SMPI regs and  under FCA COBS 13 roll up rules.

I won’t go into the detail but it depends if your pot is contract or trust based and how many consumers know that, how many care and how are they going to feel if they are told they are giving them different results to each others?

Richard has made it clear where the confusion is likely to arise

It’s not the fact that an anomaly exists (they always arise) but that the FCA think this is too much of a problem to tackle in the minimum ten months and more likely the much longer.

I guess there is a political angle behind this , depending on whether you think pensions are wealth or retirement income, whether you are Treasury of DWP , whether you are FCA or DWP. But this is where Government needs to be big and make a ruling. We simply can’t have two sets of rules governing what we are told we can expect, rules that are different and most like give us different rules.

Comparisons matter to people; simple comparisons that measure VFM in a fair way; telling them what they can expect,  in a way they can trust.

This illustration was published in 2017 by Money Marketing – it was what we were supposed to get away from!

We cannot let things slide back into a morass of complication!  We need consistency with every pot published as a pension on a dashboard.

Posted in pensions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment