Posted January 13th, 2012
I have recently been asked to assist in a challenging divorce case involving a client who was in serious ill health. Serious ill health is defined as life expectancy of 12 months or less and there are strict rules surrounding the payment of benefits in this situation.
I was asked to provide guidance on a number of scenarios:
- The benefits are drawn now based on normal health.
- The benefits are drawn now based on serious ill health provisions.
- What happens on death.
- What benefits might be paid to children.
- What benefits would be payable if the pensions were subject to 100% pension sharing orders.
Where the planning opportunities arose was in the difference between benefits that been crystallised (i.e. in payment) and uncrystallised (i.e. those that were not).
For uncrystallised benefits it is possible for a tax free lump sum to be taken in lieu of the whole of the pension benefits. But for crystallised benefits this is not
possible and either ill health retirement provisions apply for final salary benefits or impaired life annuities or drawdown for money purchase with the option
for lump sum benefits to be paid upon later death.
It was important to understand each client’s needs and what they were looking to achieve. Then it was a case of balancing the desire for a tax free payment now versus protecting the value of the benefits that had been accrued to date.
If your divorce settlement / pension sharing case is affected by these issues why not get in touch for a free, confidential, no obligation chat on 0800 092 1229 or send an email advice@thedivorceifa.co.uk
Tags: Crystallised, drawdown, Final Salary, Impaired life annuities, lump sum, Money Purchase, Pension, Pension Benefits, Pension Sharing, Serious Ill Health, Uncrystallised | Posted in Pension Sharing |
Comments: No Comments yet!
Posted May 19th, 2011
I am currently dealing with an interesting case which involves two parts of the same scheme.
Unfortunately, at outset the clients received two different cash equivalent transfer values (under separate cover) and the assumption was made that the schemes were different. This was a fair assumption at the time given that one scheme provided for money purchase benefits and the other defined benefits. An actuarial report was undertaken and it was agreed that each scheme would be shared differently (100% for the money purchase / 31% for the defined benefit).
What happened next was ridiculous. The credit member’s solicitors sent the two pension sharing orders to the scheme involved for pre-approval before submission to court and they were approved. Only when the orders were submitted to the scheme for implementation were they rejected with the scheme confirming that only one pension sharing order can be set against one pension scheme. The two schemes were in fact two sections of the same scheme.
Now we are left with the situation where we have two pension benefits which the clients have agreed to share in different ways (100% and 31%) and a single pension sharing order is too blunt an instrument to deal with sharing the benefits differently. The scheme is insisting on one pension sharing order and they will not allow for the benefits to be shared differently.
We now have to look at alternatives. The key is to check each pension benefit carefully before proceeding.
If you are experiencing difficulties with your pension sharing order and would like some advice, please do not hesitate to contact me on 01204 663904 or email phil@thedivorceifa.co.uk
Tags: Actuarial Report, Cash Equivalent Transfer Value, Defined Benefit, Money Purchase, Pension Scheme, Pension Sharing, pension sharing order | Posted in Pension Sharing |
Comments: Only 1 comment so far. Add to the discussion!
Posted December 17th, 2010
Sometimes when dealing with pensions it is easy to miss the fact that additional contributions have been paid. This is because not all additional voluntary contributions (AVCs) will be reflected in the cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) being quoted.
Where AVCs are being paid on a money purchase basis they will often accrue in a separate insurance company policy alongside the main scheme benefits.
So, my advice when dealing with a final salary scheme on pension sharing is to ask the question – have any AVCs been paid? It has not been unusual for an extra £30,000 plus of CETV to account for the AVCs and like the main scheme benefits they are able to have a pension sharing order placed against them.
If you would like to discuss pension sharing and AVCs, please contact me on 0800 092 1220 or send me an email – phil@thedivorceifa.co.uk
Tags: Accrue, Additional Contributions, Additional Voluntary Contributions, AVCs, Cash Equivalent Transfer Value, CETVs, Final Salary Scheme, Final Salary Scheme on Pension Sharing, Insurance Company Policy, Main Scheme Benefits, Money Purchase, Money Purchase Basis, Pension Sharing, Pension Sharing and AVCs, pension sharing order | Posted in Pension Sharing |
Comments: No Comments yet!
Posted October 10th, 2010
I am often asked what the differences are between defined benefit (or final salary) schemes and defined contribution (or money purchase) schemes and why those differences are important in the context of pension sharing and divorce.
Defined benefit / Final salary
As the name suggests the final pension received in retirement is defined in advance, based on an accrual basis (for example, 1/60th or 1/80th), the length of pensionable service and the level of pensionable salary at retirement.
So for someone with 40 years service on a final pensionable salary of £40,000 in an 80ths scheme the pension payable in retirement will be £20,000 per annum.
This pension will increase each year in line with the escalation provided by the scheme (this can vary) and the employer / pension scheme carries the investment and inflation risks.
Pension Sharing
The benefits provided on pension sharing vary between schemes and these should be reviewed carefully before proceeding as often the risks of providing the benefits change hands!
On an internal pension transfer, sometimes the benefits available to the pension credit member are defined benefits, which is the case with the Public Sector Pension Schemes. These defined benefits are often very valuable to the pension credit member and it would be unusual not to advise that these should be taken.
Alternatively, the pension transfer may be placed in a money purchase arrangement often known as the default option. Here, the risks pass to the pension credit member (see below).
On an external transfer, there will be no defined benefits available (unless an annuity is being purchased) and the pension share will be placed in an individual pension arrangement. Again the risks are passed on.
Defined Contribution / Money purchase
In a defined contribution / money purchase arrangement the amount being paid into the pension scheme is defined at say 3% or 5% of salary but the final benefits are not fixed.
Instead, the final pension available is a function of the amount invested in, the investment return and prevailing annuity rates. Therefore, the pension scheme member carries all the risks.
Pension Sharing
When looking at pension sharing and money purchase schemes it is important to check what internal options are available and to check these against what is available in the pensions market.
There will be no guarantees on the income payable until an annuity is purchased and the associated risks need to be considered in the context of retirement planning goals.
If you require further information on defined benefit or defined contribution schemes, please contact us here. You can find further information on pension sharing here.
Tags: 1/60th, 1/80th, 40 years service, 80ths scheme, Accrual basis, Annuity, Default Option, Defined Benefit, Defined Contribution, Divorce, external transfer, Final Pension, final pensionable salary, Final Salary, individual pension, individual pension arrangement, inflation, internal options, internal pension, internal pension transfer, Investment, Money Purchase, Pension Credit, Pension Credit Member, Pension Scheme, Pension Sharing, pension sharing and divorce, Pension Transfer, pensionable salary, pensionable service, Public Sector, Public Sector Pension Schemes, Retirement, Risks | Posted in Pension Sharing |
Comments: No Comments yet!
Posted June 29th, 2009
When considering how to deal with pensions within a divorce settlement it is important to be aware of the many different factors which can affect the transfer value. Recent events in equity markets coupled with changes in regulations are proving that these values are rarely static. Clients, lawyers and advisers need to be vigilant when dealing with transfer values, particularly if the settlement takes time to agree.
Pensions can be separated into two main distinct types – money purchase or defined contribution or final salary or defined benefit. Depending on which type of pension you are dealing with has a major bearing on the issues surrounding transfer values.
Final Salary
Changes in the way in which actuaries calculate cash equivalent transfer values are having major impacts on settlements going forward. Since October 2008 the basis on which these values are calculated has switched from a broadly uniform one (under actuarial guidance note 11) to an individual scheme decision taken by their trustees.
So much so that values have been seen to double or halve depending on the circumstances and the schemes involved. Therefore, it is important to consider the following:
• Clients need to be aware of the potential fluctuations and their expectations managed.
• Up to date valuations are vital especially should the current valuation pre date October 2008.
• The cost of a new valuation might be a small price to pay to avoid future conflict.
Money Purchase
When dealing with money purchase pensions such as personal pensions the surrender value of the plan should be treated as the transfer value. This value can often be much less than the more readily quoted current value. Penalties, Market Value Adjustments and product charges on these contracts can affect these values and will change over time.
The key determinant of whether the fund value will move (up or down) is the amount of risk being taken within the fund. This will depend largely on how, where and what it is invested into. Therefore, it is just as important to understand what risks are being taken within these types of pensions as to worry about the overall amounts involved. It is not unusual to find within self invested pensions – high risk investments such as AIM shares or property.
My experience of risk tolerances using the FinaMetrica profiler (see www.finametrica.com) is that men’s risk tolerances are often much higher than women’s. Do your clients truly understand the amount of risk being taken within their (or their husband’s) pension?
Perhaps it might be sensible to find out their risk tolerances and consider switching investments to a less risky strategy for the duration of the divorce proceedings.
If you would like more information, please call us on 01204 663904 or contact us by email on advice@thedivorceifa.co.uk
Tags: Cash Equivalent Transfer Value, Divorce, Divorce Lawyers, Final Salary, FinaMetrica, GN11, Money Purchase, Pension, Personal Pension, Transfer values | Posted in Transfer values |
Comments: Only 1 comment so far. Add to the discussion!
