Peter@BDM said :"What we have seen is schemes, which, on pension sharing break the salary linking on the pension debit members pension, even though they remain an active member of the scheme. Net result, the total value (both shares added together) is irrevocably harmed as a consequence of making a pension sharing order! This is why we believe that an assessment of how the order will be implemented should be done in all cases before the order is made."
Please can you tell us how schemes break the salary linking on the pension debit members pension?
I'm shocked by the idea that both shares of a final salary salary pension shared on divorce might completely lose the "employer's promise" that the pension will pay a given income on retirement.
I'm slowly getting used to the rotten fact that my share was forced out of the defined benefit section by the trustees even though that's not what they said they would do in docs sent to court - but the idea that the trustees/his old firm are also now rid of the responsibility of paying my ex his rightful due of one sixtieth of salary times the number of years he overworked to make them rich....minus my share ...
Is it true schemes can do this under current regulations without warning the scheme member in advance?
Why aren't solicitors putting up red flags all round final salary pensions?
Can we sue our solicitors for not warning us if this happens?
Once again it all comes down to the information got before pension sharing happens -
Family Law Ancillary Relief Protocol
"4.5.3 Having obtained the CETV of any pensions, solicitors should decide whether in any case it is appropriate to apply for a pension sharing or pension attachment order. Factors that will influence this decision will include the age of the parties, the
size of the CETV value of the funds, the length of the marriage,the jurisdiction in which the pension is held and the possible costs involved in the implementation of a pension sharing order."
What about whether sharing the pension will automatically radically reduce the income it's capable of generating?
Form P is supposed to list "all the information that can and should be obtained from the pension companies"
The government's Pensions Advisory Service TPAS has recently advised me that it really is irrelevant what the pension scheme writes in Form P because Form P is not contractual - it needn't be correct and they don't have to stick to it.
So even if a solicitor sticks to all the regulations and official forms they will still be negligent in protecting clients doing pension sharing unless they contact the pension scheme themselves or hire an actuary to get the real answers and the information needed rather than what's required under the flimsy regulations?