Hi, would anyone like to share how it went? I did apply 2.0 line spacing as per the guidance received on the 26th ( thanks Helen for confirming that it is what we should be doing ), though i think we'd be fine if we just use normal paragraph... I noticed i put 14 April 2019 as date as opposed to 2021... damn it
For me 50/50 chance this time (and better than my prev sittings). I thought the impact of small pots to the trust was hard to think of, let alone putting it simply. Impact to the members was more obvious.
the information to answer the question is given in the paper though - so know need to think of impact on trust. I believe it stated that small pension pots can be unsustainable for providers as charges won't cover expenses. However as the example shown different structures would increase the pots at retirement and hence cover the costs.
how did you title your report and what are the sections? for me i have titled the report as 'Issues with small pension pots'. (kinda regret. should be using something like 'Recommendation for a review in charging structure'.) then i had (0) Introduction (1) Background of the issue (2) Trends observed in OTA (3) What it means to the members and OTA (4) Charging structure (5) Summary...
I thought about it but decided not to have 'background and issue' section but had other ones you had. I instead put background at the start of each section.
I think I just couldn't think of points to put down for the 'unsustainable ' argument. When I looked at the charges and expenses for deferred pots, I thought they weren't too bad P&L for the trust (at least better than the active pots as they're more expense to manage) as they charge a fixed fee that is enough to cover the admin cost and some of the regulatory cost (we knew investment cost won't be covered anyway even at the highest % permittable). What points did you put down for this argument?
