In Reply to: Re: AVC posted by Equally Ill Informed on 02 June 2003 at 08:42:23:
Oh ...... dear!
>>This response shows the great problem with fora - getting ill-informed answers.<<
Pretty much everything you said in your response is factually incorrect.
>>2. The GAR and the annual guaranteed 3.5% are DIFFERENT things!<<
In the last EL compromise deal effectively GARs that hadn't exercised their rights or left the fund ceased to exist. This may in fact be overturned if litigation currently being consiidered by several EL groups proceeds. I don't think from your answer you have understood this.
>>Even non-GAR Equitable people get the 3.5% annual bonus<<
No they do not.
>>3. I think there is a limit on the money you would get if a company went bust. Thought it was 100% of the first £2000 and then 90% of the next £33000 then nothing beyond that!<<
Wrong again. This is the banking guarantee scheme that undewrites banks if they go bust - not the insurance company scheme. There is a 90% guarantee in the insurance industry that might cover pensions but it isn't as straightforward as it first appears. If an insurance company goes down the calculation will probably take into account what the valuer considers to be over-valuation ie previously declared bonuses that he considers to be in excess of a true value. 90% is most unlikely to be 90% of any value stated on any previous annual report.
>>Please don't respond to questions unless you KNOW the answer or put some sort of rider on your response. <<
Perhaps you should have done the same ...............
GG