The findings of a report into the near-collapse at mutual life insurer Equitable Life have been outlined in the Commons.
It has found a culture of manipulation and concealment among some of the company's previous management.
Around 800,000 people lost money after it was revealed that the Equitable did not have sufficient funds to honour guaranteed annuity policies (GARs).
This led to the mutual life insurer having to cut the pensions and retirement savings of its policyholders to stay afloat.
Have you been affected by the near-collapse of Equitable Life? Will the report make a difference? Send us your experiences.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:
This debate is now closed. Read your comments below.
 |
I have seen my pension cut, cut and cut again
|
My late husband worked for many years for Equitable Life and happily sold their contracts in good faith. He died three years ago and I have seen my pension cut, cut and cut again - this year by 24%. I am now having to go into equity release to be able to stay in my home. Since Gordon Brown has extracted some £30 billions from the industry surely he is honour bound to make SOME recompense.
Ann Wright, England
I signed up a few years ago, but bailed out after the court case. It was a very impressive sales pitch and pictures! Lots of solid stone, wrought iron railings, old wise grey men in suits looking superior and est. 17.. something or other. And now it's a pile of nothing.
Tony McLachlan, London
No, but I will be. Like many others, I have decided not to take out a pension - instead I have invested in other areas. Yet now, because of some dodgy company, and a bunch of people who invested badly - I guess my taxes will be affected to bail them out! I hope the government will fill any shortfall I end up with, if my investments go pear-shaped!
James, Dorset, UK
It's not just Equitable investors suffering. Many of us thought we would enjoy a pension until the companies we had worked hard for went bust taking the pensions with them. I had hoped to retire at 65 which I thought was a reasonable age to pack it in, but now, at 68, still working. The state pension is not capable of feeding me and my family.
Ginger, UK
Take may advice - keep it under a mattress and then blow the whole wad on a 10-year round the world bonanza. Finally, settle down in Goa, grow your grey hair long and smoke huge amounts of ganja. All your financial woes will fade away and you'll be much happier.
Jon, UK
|
No-one sensible will now invest in a pension scheme
|
Mr Blair has finally been honest in saying no government can bail out a pension fund, because of the sums involved. The corollary is that no pension investment is secure and so no-one sensible will now invest in a pension scheme. At least we can stop pretending there's regulation and compensation.
Roger, UK
How come everybody ignores the extra £5.3 billion pounds per year that has been extracted from pension funds, through the change in tax rules introduced by Gordon Brown in 1997. This change has affected everybody's pension and it is unlikely that, in the future, any pension fund, unless funded up to 30% of salary, will ever be sufficient to pay the old standard pension of 2/3rds salary from 60/65 yrs.
P Barber, England
After a long period with a responsible employer I had to start a separate private pension when I became self- employed. When you are paying 100% of your own contributions without any matching employer's amount it is very hard when your investment goes badly wrong. I got so fed up with all the bad news and the forest of papers arriving through the letter box that I moved out of Equitable - took the penalties - and have the residue in another safer plan. I shall have to postpone my retirement, invest more to pay for it - and I'll be less well off when I get there. Retirement's golden age has definitely passed.
JB, England, UK
If the Treasury is unwilling to pay compensation (even though Penrose stated that the regulatory system had failed policyholders) then it should, at least, give us the opportunity to take our funds out of Equitable without any taxation penalty. I would rather invest my fund in property but cannot because of the pension and taxation rules that prevent me.
Ken Milne, England
|
I don't think there has been any malicious wrong-doing, just poor decision making
|
I bought a With Profits Endowment from Equitable in 1997 to accompany my mortgage and I bailed out in early 2000 as soon as their problems started making the news. I made a small loss but you live and learn. I don't think there has been any malicious wrong-doing, just poor decision making on the part of the people who ran the company. They made some pretty big promises and when the market went sour they couldn't keep them - it happens all the time.
Simon, UK
A lot of people are saying that they should receive compensation from the Government because the regulator did not stop EL. Surely the point is that a regulator is there to prevent companies from acting illegally. If what EL did was legal then how can the regulator intervene? It is like asking a bookie to refund your money because the horse you backed came last.
Paul, England
The problem has always been that up until now, with disasters like Equitable Life, ordinary people didn't really appreciate that when they joined a company and started contributing to their company pension scheme, they were taking a risk. Most people believed that the money was put somewhere safe until retirement. Only now are they finding out the sad truth. A pension saving should be just that - a saving. It's time we started a savings pension scheme rather than an invested scheme, and started to get some confidence back in the pensions industry.
Grant, Scotland
I took out a policy with Equitable Life because I had confidence. Confidence in the oldest Life Office in the world. Confidence in the concept of mutuality, and confidence in the process of regulation. Never for one moment did I contemplate failure on such a scale and I feel betrayed. For a long time I have been paying regular premiums to a society whom I had utmost faith in the knowledge that my wife and I would be secure in retirement. Such thoughts now seem more like delusions as we are left bereft of hope and facing painful reality. Why should any young person invest for the future?
Colin Adams, United Kingdom
I am plan holder with Equitable Life. Yes, the Government, FSA, directors and non-exec directors should take responsibility. However, how many of the plan holders just ticked the "yes" boxes on the proxy forms and returned them without reading the accounts. I am guilty of that, just as a number of other members are. On the other side of the coin the FSA and Law Lords are extensions of government and as a result of their decisions and ruling members of EL have lost out, but then this government won't help as they never appear to take responsibility for their actions.
Jonathan, UK
I know it is harsh but if the government pays out compensation in this case it will be setting a dangerous precedent whereby either 1, the government pays out every time a scheme collapses or 2, the government, through fear of having to pay such compensation, regulates schemes out of existence.
Gareth, England
If we are not to receive compensation, perhaps a Loan could be made interest free by the government in order that the with-profits fund can be secured and Equitable Life could then reinvest in the stock market in order that higher investment returns can be obtained.
Chris Davies, United Kingdom
|
If the state wishes to reduce its pension provision burden via the private route it must act like it and be the guarantor of last resort
|
I am an Equitable policyholder - I am also a taxpayer. Many of the posts below seek to portray me as greedy if I seek compensation from the state. By the same logic, smokers and the obese using the NHS are also greedy - since I barely ever use the NHS but pay for it handsomely via taxation. I signed up to the Equitable in good faith, it being the only scheme on offer from my employer at the time. My point is that if the state wishes to reduce its pension provision burden via the private route it must act like it and be the guarantor of last resort in this type of situation.
Andrew, UK
I'm gutted! 5 years away from retirement and no chance of recovering my lost pension. I can't tell you what I think of "financial managers".
Brian Harden, UK
I am one of the people who hold a GAR policy and did NOT support the claim against Equitable Life. The actions EL wanted to take were absolutely fair under the circumstances and the significant mistake was that made by the Law Lords who completely misunderstood the case. If the Lords had not upheld the claim (which was only made by a small number of selfish policy holders) EL would still be in business and we would all be in a far better position than we are now.
John, UK
I and many of my workmates, being ex Dexion employees, where firstly robbed by this government of our company pension and then by useless regulators robbed of our investment in AVC. Compensation? I don't really care anymore, I like many of your writers will never again invest for my pension, and I would definitely advise others to think very carefully before doing so. Unless you're in the public sector or you're an asylum seeker you will receive little support from this government. Thanks for looking after the working class Mr Blair!!!!
Mick, England
I notice a lot of people are saying that the EL pension holder took a risk and lost. Unfortunately they were not informed that this particular risk existed and if they had, they would not have invested their money there. As a EL pension holder I would never have invested my money to basically pay extra to those who owned the society prior to my joining. I still believe the House of Lords judgement was just plain wrong, it cannot be right for people who had no control over the guarantee decision to then be held liable. Only those policy holders who were at the EL at the time the guarantees were handed out should be liable.
Phil Jeremy, UK
|
The issue is that Equitable took money from some investors to pay others
|
The issue is that Equitable took money from some investors to pay others. When the Lords ruled that the guaranteed funds should be paid that should have bankrupted the company and those with guarantees should just have got what the funds were worth. Stealing money from other investors was not fair. Expecting the tax payer to cover this is also not fair. I paid AVCs through my company pension scheme so I could retire a couple of years early. I wish I'd just spent the money.
John Leitch, UK
I'm 26 and haven't started paying into a pension scheme yet, nor do I plan to. Recent events have shown what most pension schemes are... pyramid schemes. The only people who will EVER make any money out of pension schemes is the people selling and managing them.
Nathan Hobbs, Luton, UK
Why was I allowed to start investing in 1997 when those in control knew this was impending? There was nothing wrong with MY pension yet my "investment" is now worth less than I put in. This is deception and theft. All those responsible should be jailed.
John Holgate, UK
In a way I feel sorry for the people who lost money with Equitable but the bottom line with any investment is 'if it sounds too good to be true then it almost certainly is'. When it's being recommended by Governments, who are really good at finances (?), and HR departments who are even worse, then you have to take responsibility for being one of the 'blind following the blind'. Personal accountability has to come in to this situation somewhere.
Gareth, Bermuda
So the Government is not going to compensate for regulatory failure. I don't expect to be supported by the state, but neither do I expect to be hindered by them. First Gordon Brown removed the tax credit on pension dividends, then he removed the ability for individuals to catch back pension contributions. And we are told we must save for our old age. Why?, when it is always stolen to support the feckless.
Simon, England
|
The EL debacle has shown that pensions are an outdated mode of savings
|
The EL debacle has shown that pensions are an outdated mode of savings. It is a con that the government has perpetuated far too long as the only vehicle for savings for old age. What other savings schemes means that you have to lock way your money for 40 years and have to buy an annuity with it at the end even if its poor value? Insurance companies charge extortionate money to gamble with your money and Gordon Brown's removal of the tax breaks has made it even less attractive. Stick your money in property or schemes that you have some control over and you're much better off.
Kevin
I am an Equitable policy holder. I am passing on to my three children, all in their 20s, the lessons I have learned from this fiasco, never to give their money to anyone else to manage but to look after it themselves. I say buy shares or property, but do it yourself. Equitable is not the only pension scheme to suffer. People with private pensions have seen the Chancellor raid them for his own coffers, by taxing dividends.
Pension plans were a long term agreement between the state and those saving for their future so as not to be a burden on the state. The agreement was to forego spending now with tax incentives to encourage saving. I note that all MPs have very nice public service pensions, so no worries there then! Come to think of it perhaps the best advice I can give to my sons and daughter is to get a civil service job, secure in the knowledge that their pensions will be backed by the Government, in more sense than one.
Andrea, UK
|
I am not surprised that the younger generation are not starting pensions and would rather spend the money now
|
I am one of the younger generation that who was encouraged by the Government that it was important to start a Pension early. I did, with Equitable Life. I now have 2 years of contributions stuck in Equitable Life by swinging penalties if I remove my money. I have since started another plan through my place of employment. We are all told that it is the early years investments that make the money as they have the longest time invested. I am not surprised that the younger generation are not starting pensions and would rather spend the money now when things like this are allowed to happen.
Jim, Beds, UK
I worked for ELAS as a sales rep between '91 and '96 and left to be an Independent Financial Adviser. The fault for this debacle has always been at the door of the directors. However, a large number of policyholders also chose to put their weight behind ELAS in spite of an increasing amount of warnings and words of caution being voiced from the mid 90s.
It is rather sad that many feel that they are better off putting the money under the mattress or in the building society or rely on the state to bail them out. If that is what they want, be ready for 10 to 15% interest rates and mortgages or far higher income tax. Welcome to the second millennium. You can't run an economy like that. The sooner we have a compulsory level of savings the better. Too many claim they cannot save and then borrow money for fancy cars, holidays etc.
CP, UK
How did the company's auditors kept giving Equitable Life clean audit reports for so many years and charge millions in the process? In my view it was totally negligent auditing.
R Mehta, UK
Anyone who pays money into any sort of pension scheme is mad. You're potentially giving money to a company for 40 years during which time the rules (both the company's and the govt's) will change many times. Now when (not if) the rule changes adversely affect you then can you get your money out? No. It's stuck in a pension fund of some sort until the day you retire. You're basically giving your money away in the vague hope that at some point in the future there might be something other than a pittance available from an annuity. Me? I'll overpay the mortgage rather than pay money into the lottery that is the financial services industry in this country.
John, UK
The government just doesn't get it. It has a dual responsibility to compensate the policy holders and to prosecute the Equitable managers. Both actions are essential to sustain any confidence for the public who are being urged to save for their future. The state must be an effective regulator and a last-resort guarantor. If it ducks either responsibility, the whole private saving mechanism will collapse.
JC, UK
Behind all the headline criticisms is the underlying cause - when employees are required to meet commission targets, there will always be this potential for trouble, and Equitable Life is not alone in this matter.
Jonathan, UK
|
With fiascos like Equitable seeming to become ever-more common it's hardly surprising that younger generations lack interest in saving
|
With fiascos like Equitable seeming to become ever-more common it's hardly surprising that younger generations lack interest in saving into a closed pension fund. If anything goes wrong in the next 30 years my retirement could be plunged into poverty. Or I could spend it now on having fun and claim all the benefits going when I retire.
Karl Peters, UK
There is a big difference between someone who lost money because the market did not perform as they had hoped and someone who lost money because they were given false information when they made their choices. In the case of the former group, it's simply down to bad luck and moving on - at the end of the day you don't invest money unless you can afford to lose it.
The second group deserve some kind of compensation, but surely not from the taxpayer? I'm already struggling to pay for a pension of my own without subsidising the failures of others. The managers and salespeople from Equitable Life who created this mess should be paying, not the already pressed taxpayer.
John B, UK
On one hand the government is urging the ever ageing public to ease the state pensions burden by taking out more private pensions yet, with the increase in mal-administered funds on the rise and the perception of mistrust in the public as a whole, the time has come for the government to take the initiative and hold fund administrators accountable for the losses in order to regain consumer confidence.
Mark Dowle, UK
With this sort of thing happening and no one held to account, why should I ever take out a private pension?
David Lovett, England
|
All of our monies would have been safer buried in the garden!!
|
I find it absolutely despicable, that many of us, will be left high and dry, and have to start over. All of our monies would have been safer buried in the garden!!
Andy Ritchings, UK
I went into Equitable because it was a mutual with, in early 80s a good reputation. I bet wrong - tough. But I do feel angry that, having sat it out & held the policy to maturity, the Equitable will penalise me if I take my fund as "deferred benefits". What difference does it make to them if the money leaves via the open market option or to my own fund?
Ralph Metcalfe, UK
I think we are getting close to a time where corporate managers need to be very careful about arrogant attitudes, corporate greed and cavalier behaviour. I believe that their customers (who are also loosing faith in the regulators and the lawmakers to make these people accountable) will soon start to take it out on them selves. They have no idea how angry their customers are.
Niel Hillawi, UK
The government encourages you to save for retirement, you do and then this happens. You might as well have spent the money on holidays and cars or just burnt it. Some advice!
Bridge, UK
I note the many comments that the investor in a pension policy should take all the risk. I was fully prepared to accept the risk of my investments not performing as well as forecast, even of investment decisions being of poor quality. I do not think that I should have had to take the risk that this government (and its predecessors) would through their ineffective regulators, stand by and allow fund managers to take on commitments to pay out guaranteed annuities where there were no prospects of being able to meet those guarantees. Neither do I think that I should have had to take the risk that once the problem was laid bare, greedy Equitable Life policyholders would be allowed to insist on their guarantees being honoured in full at the expense of all the other policyholders who did not have these rights.
Charles, UK
|
My money is safer under my bed
|
Successive governments have told us that we must make financial provision for our retirement. I did, and lost a great deal of money with the Equitable. I am only 34 but paid in large amounts of my salary for over 10 years, all for nothing. Pensions should not be a financial 'risk' and should be guaranteed by the state. I would not dare risk putting any further funds into a pension fund until this happens. My money is safer under my bed.
Alan Jones, England
Some very snide and petty comments from people who haven't lost out! When you lose money through no fault of your own when given advice to invest....yes, you will feel very bitter and want compensation for something that was not your own fault! You take advice and make your own decision. Yes. But to say we were greedy? No....I paid someone for advice, a so-called professional! Surely they are the ones who should have said the forecasts were very optimistic! Not me!
Russ, Leeds, England
I am scathing about the government's reaction to the Penrose report. In our area the council tax is rising by 9% but public services are being cut - the rise is being used to make up the shortfall in local government employees' pensions.
BH, UK
Once again the government shows total disregard for people who have invested in pensions. What does that tell younger workers who are being asked to contribute to their future? As for some comments that investors should not get compensation, the whole idea of investing in a pension was to save the government money by paying for our own future.
E. Irons, England
I was not informed that Equitable Life had promised GARs to many of its customers. If I had known this, I would not have put my money into Equitable Life AVCs. This seems to me a much more clear-cut case of "mis-selling" than has occurred with endowment policies.
Jon, England
|
Never bet more than you can afford
|
In the end everything, insurance, pensions, stocks, etc, are all just betting. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Never bet more than you can afford (leave it in the building society).Once you realise this great truth, life becomes much easier to deal with.
Catherine Dyer, UK
Frankly, the problem we face with pensions is one of education, not regulation. Those people who have seen the value of their investments fall and are complaining are ignorant of their choices - you should ensure your investments are balanced between things like shares, bonds and property (to name but a few). If you place your money with a provider, you are taking a risk on not only the market in which they will invest on your behalf but also on that company. Look before you leap! There is no such thing as a free lunch. In order to save safely for retirement you need to understand what you are purchasing.
Alex, UK
Another day, another judge, another whitewash. The government off the hook again, what a surprise!
Chris, UK
I too had saved conscientiously (up to 35% of earnings) and expected to be able to retire on a modest pension at 60. I'm 62 now and would like to make way for a graduate seeking a start. I can't be sacked and feel less use to my employer as days go by. The collapse stopped me from saving for three years now. I'm glad to pick up my pay each month (from the public purse) and must continue until things improve, maybe indefinitely after October 2006 when I can't be sacked just for reaching state retirement age. There were clear failures here which should undermine faith in the present system. The state will have to pay one way or the other!
John, UK
I had an Equitable personal pension, due to a company scheme wind-up. The value of the fund was cut a couple of times and the transfer penalty kept going up so I decided to cut my losses and transferred out. I will be robbed again if compensation is offered. It has put me off ever contributing to a pension again and I haven't for the past five years. They were considered to be the best but we all feel cheated.
Jackie, UK
I am a widow and am 60 this year and was hoping to retire on my birthday. Since the death of my husband, which is 13 years ago, I have worked and contributed into a pension scheme so that I could subsidise my state pension. I knew very little about investing but thought saving into a company pension scheme was a safe option. Needless to say that I'm with Equitable Life and have ended up with not knowing what the future holds.
Brenda, UK
I used to work for Equitable Life in the IT dept around the time this whole situation was becoming apparent. It seemed, on the whole, a well managed mutual society. It wasn't run for profits of shareholders. Its costs were very low, and bonuses for policyholders very good, and was the largest provided of group AVCs. Had the relatively small number of people who had guaranteed annuities accepted reduced bonuses (still in-line with the going rate) then all the other policyholders (the majority) would not now be in the position of losing their money.
Anon, UK
All the comments seem to be forgetting one group of people. I had an ordinary pension fund with Equitable "no extra high guarantees". In desperation I took my fund out of Equitable into Scottish Widows and lost a total of 50% of my fund in the process from when the crash commenced and including a deduction for transfer costs. Why should I have lost 50% of my money when I only have two years to go to retirement and no chance of catching up?
Jean Nicholas, UK
Please explain to me how Equitable Life losers are different from people whose endowment mortgages will fail to pay off house loans? When one group gets help from the state, perhaps the others can, too, however those of us who lost the means of paying off our mortgages are having to accept our bad luck, as should EL's customers. This is how capitalism works - you can't win all the time.
Di, UK
Compensation, or additional OAP benefits? Either way you'll end up a "burden" on the state. Neither method will grant you the return you were hoping for. Why should the taxpayer subsidise investors who are unlucky? Investing inherently carries risk with it and people should be responsible for their investment choices.
Lee Hayes, UK
Through changes in the 1997 Finance Act, Chancellor Gordon Brown increased the taxation on pension funds by £5.3 billion per year. Little wonder that most pension funds have had trouble making ends meet since that date.
P Barber, England
I am now 59 and I planned to retire when I am 60, this has cost me dearly, I wanted to save extra whilst in an Occupational Pension Scheme. The only possible way of saving was with the Equitable life, I stated with AVC contributions in 1989 and hoped that it would fund my pension. It is clear that there were problems even then but I was not aware of them as Equitable was given a high rating by the Government Actuary. I took further policies in 1998 and in 2000 just before the crash. For no fault of my own I have lost thousands. Someone is responsible and I want to know who. I also want to know what has happened to my money? It is about £20,000.
Paul Martin, UK
The claims of the Equitable Life always were preposterous. Why should the greedy people who believed those claims be compensated by those who didn't?
Andrew Dundas, UK
|
As a taxpayer I find it offensive that they should be paid compensation
|
I've had to provide my own pension which is of the money purchase type. My pension investments too have suffered during the recent stock market downturn . I'm sorry, but I don't have any sympathy with people who chose to invest in Equitable Life. They invested because they wanted to make more money. Quite simple really. And they lost. As a taxpayer I find it offensive that they should be paid compensation. Who is going to compensate me?
Patrick Hall, UK
The whole concept of people investing their long term future with organizations whose whole outlook is short-term profiteering is flawed. Pensions should be the sole responsibility of the state, and keep the moneylenders of the private sector well away.
Mike, UK
Whilst it must be a very worrying time for those people who have pensions with Equitable Life - the taxpayer should not have to bear the burden of compensating them. I am 24 and have been making contribution into my pension scheme for 3 years. When I moved from the public to the private sector I lost a third of what I had already saved in transferring the money. I also get taxed on my pension contributions. If the compensation is taken from taxpayers' money surely I am being taxed and then taxed again simply for the good fortune of not taking out an equitable life pension?
Rachel, UK
The suggestion that a company that spends all it makes and keeps little in reserve it asking for trouble is not exactly rocket science. After the 1987 "crash" Equitable Life had just 3% more than it needed to cover its liabilities. The Regulators have no real excuse for not spotting this and dealing with it in good time. The first thing that the Government should do is remove the immunity from prosecution that the Regulator enjoys - being able to be sued for mis-regulation might well help the Regulator to concentrate on protecting the interest of the public instead of wasting it in drafting pointless rules.
Adrian, Essex
What about all those Equitable Life 'top sellers' who have no mortgage, new expensive cars and large savings. How do they sleep at night?
Hannah, Wales
The whole concept of people investing their long term future with organizations whose whole outlook is short-term profiteering is flawed. Pensions should be the sole responsibility of the state, and keep the moneylenders of the private sector well away.
Mike, UK
|
I strongly believe that they therefore have a moral obligation to compensate us for our losses
|
I have seen my savings reduced by some £20,000. I am 59 so I lose if I move them or lose if I keep them where they are. My view is that from the day I started work I was encouraged to save for my retirement. Now as it gets closer I can see that I could easily end up with a substantial block of that saving completely wiped out. Of course I and the many others in my position deserve compensation. The government cannot just opt in and out when it suits them. They are responsible for the current economic situation and it is that situation that has created the problems associated with failing insurance companies. I strongly believe that they therefore have a moral obligation to compensate us for our losses.
David Manners, England
It's a farce. All my contracted-out NI contributions have gone into my EL policy. Does that mean I won't even end up with a decent 'basic' pension?
Ian, London, UK
For many years, my wife was strongly advised by her HR department to take out AVCs with Equitable Life. They did this in good faith. Luckily she chose to ignore their advice for many years and only succumbed 6 years ago. The amount she 'invested' is now virtually worthless. The HR person who advised her is in a much worse situation as he took his own advice and 'invested' in AVCs many years before my wife.
Brian Horton, UK
I paid a small sum to Equitable Life as an additional voluntary contribution to my company pension scheme. I asked my pension provider to withdraw my funds from the company when Equitable kept reducing their valuation of the worth of my investment over a period of several months.
Mike Horsfall, UK
Even with my miniscule state pension I pay tax. Why should these punters expect me to pay for their misfortune? I don't expect the government to recompense me when I back a losing horse.
Colin Gray, England
Equitable sold policies to people by saying that no shareholders get to take a slice from their savings because it was a mutual. You don't get something for nothing. Shareholders earn a dividend by taking on risk. If there are no shareholders then the risk lies with the policyholders. It's your choice when you invest whether you want to pay a shareholder to take some of the risk for you. People need to live with the effect of their choices.
Andrew, UK
I was sold an Equitable Life pension at a time when the company AND THE REGULATORS must have known my money was being put at risk. It seems to me that I was kept in the dark. I believe this is a very real problem of misrepresentation and the investment years I have lost will never be regained. Investment by me and others in a private pension has saved the government billions of pounds. That is why the government should compensate us. Were we fooled by the company and the government regulators? Personally, I expect the report to be a sanitised whitewash allowing the government to wash its hands of blame and financial responsibility.
Peter Hitchmough, England
Spread between two with profits policies and a free standing AVC scheme, I have lost about £15,000. Bad, but at least I am only in my mid-40s and not in such a desperate plight as those of retirement age who have been let down so badly by Equitable Life and the regulators. I am not holding out any hope of redress as a result of Penrose, and certainly would be amazed if the government paid out anything if regulatory failure was to be identified as an issue in this case.
Rodger Edwards, UK
What is rarely reported is that, according to reports on the EMAG website, the Equitable Life was deeply in deficit throughout the 1990's even without the GAR problem. A With-profits fund should have reserves to cover "rainy days" and periods of bad investment performance. The Equitable had 25% less funds than required in 1990. This basically equates to a Ponzi scheme, where new money is lured in by paying way over the odds to earlier investors. We all pay for the regulators to protect us from fraud etc, now it is time to compensate those who tried to save prudently for their retirement. Equitable's policy holders are not all "well heeled". Many have small policies.
Anonymous, UK
Whatever the outcome, you can be sure that the culprits are well rewarded and have no pension problems themselves. I for one, now intend to be a burden on the state.
Richard Bagnall, Cambridge, UK
|
Ruth Kelly has to restore confidence in the insurance industry by admitting the regulatory failings
|
The government are keen to persuade people to make their own provisions for their retirement. I did exactly that throughout my working life and can see why people are not responding to government advice. As an Equitable Life annuitant, I have seen my pension drop by over 25 percent in the last year. Ruth Kelly has to restore confidence in the insurance industry by admitting the regulatory failings and setting the wheels in motion for compensation.
Anthony Searle, England
The idea that money is gambled in order to pay people's pensions needs to be better affirmed in the process of selling these things. When you invest money, you are doing so with the sole aim of increasing its value - the fact that it could go down to zero needs to be given more exposure when buying these plans.
Nick, UK
The Equitable affair has been just another serial blunder/cover up by the regulators. Just remember that every policyholder pays money which is deducted out of policy charges to the regulator. The regulators are not working for free and hence should provide a professional service.
Roy Fitch, UK
I doubt very much if adequate compensation will ever be available if so many people have lost out as I have. My very ordinary AVC pension fund would require over £15,000 to begin to restore the penalty losses alone. I am very afraid nothing of substance will emerge from the report.
Richard McCulloch, Scotland
They call it a blame culture. Always someone else's fault, not your own. I have never yet heard an Equitable Life member say 'bad mistake of mine that, all my fault at the end of the day as I chose to sign up'. Pity the really - very poor - folk who paid into occupational company schemes all their lives and whose pensions died when their companies failed. Many of these folk now have NO options, nothing. Who really deserves compensation here?
James, Leeds, UK
We are all encouraged to save for our old age and not be a burden on the state. What were/are the state departments doing to protect our compliance with their recommendations? Get money from the (any) government?. I will be pleasantly surprised
John Moore, UK
Very frustrating to see years of important pension contributions wiped out without any protection or recompense. In a world where people are increasingly expected to look after themselves - repaying student loans, pensions, private health - and can't get access to state benefits if they have any sort of savings - there has to be s strong regulatory environment - that actually means something - to protect people.
John Humphrey, UK
|
Their letters concerning the House of Lords action seemed reassuring
|
I was in two pension schemes before I joined my current employer, who operated an Equitable Life scheme. The mathematics prepared by an Equitable Life agent appeared to suggest that I would be better off consolidating my pensions into an Equitable Life scheme, since over a period of time, given lower charges from Equitable and projected fund performance, I would not lose out. I duly transferred my policies into Equitable, losing a lot of money on the transfer - but I accepted this since pensions are for the 'long term'. I couldn't choose which equity plan I wanted to go into and given stock market volatility, I chose the with-profits plan; it was explained that I could transfer this into an equity plan whenever I wanted. It has since transpired that I was given this advice even though Equitable had already lost their case in the High Court. Their letters concerning the House of Lords action seemed reassuring.
I've now moved out of Equitable into another plan, losing even more money. Everyone takes risks; but this is on the basis of complete and reliable information. I did not receive such information and neither, I suggest, did many thousands of others. No way should Equitable have been allowed to sell schemes that were the subject of potentially catastrophic court action whilst issuing reassuring messages to policy holders about their chance of success.
Terry, London
Whilst I have sympathy, I don't think taxpayers' money should be used. Would tax payers get cash back if the firm made massive profits? Very unlikely. There may be trouble ahead.
Mark, England
I eagerly await the report but to be honest I think the government department responsible will try for many years to put off compensating me and many like me. I do hope that we will get answers but don't think this is likely bearing in mind that the government is made up of ex-lawyers and they certainly know how to prolong issues.
E. Sloan, England
I think that this case highlights the need to protect the taxpayer. Whilst I have sympathy with those who have lost money from this case, I can see no reason why the taxpayer should be asked to pay compensation. The government should regulate the finance industry to make investing a safer activity for ordinary investors. What it can never do is remove risk entirely, and the investor should always carry that burden of risk.
Simon Osborne, England
Simon Osborne comments "the investor...should carry burden of risk". Then what IS the point of having a regulator? Currently, the government needs those in their 20s and 30s to make pension provision. If they see regulatory failure without compensation, then why would they bother?
Shaun Wragg, Northern Ireland
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~30~RS~)
One-Minute World News
News services
E-mail this to a friend
Printable version
