SIPPs have lost 'millions of pounds' as a result of the collapse of Keydata, providers say, as the scale of the deficits slowly come to light.
Investors are now starting to be compensated and some of the money returned to their fund, but only up to the £48,000 FSCS compensation limit.
Any shortfall not covered by the scheme is lost from the SIPP, leaving many with a black hole in their funding.
Providers say potentially tens of thousands of pounds will have been wiped off investors’ individual retirement pots, which could prove impossible to plug for savers nearing their retirement date.
Jonathan Lochery, director of IPM SIPP Administration, says: “Some of our clients had £150,000 in a single investment in Keydata.
“We had 44 people invested in Keydata via our SIPP, with each investment being worth between £50k and £150k. We are talking millions of pounds here.”
Martin Tilley, business development director at Dentons, says Keydata exposure through SIPPs has been widespread. This will mean many providers will have seen AUM in their products drastically depleted.
“We are fortunate in that our IFAs tend to focus more on alternatives like commercial property, but some have put clients into structured products so we have a few cases,” he says.
John Moret, director of MoreToSIPPs, adds: “There was some investment in traded life settlements via SIPPs. I would say it was a small percentage of total scheme assets, but that is not an insignificant amount of money.”
The FSA put Keydata into administration in June 2009 after it emerged hundreds of its ISA products may have been “illegal”, triggering a multi-million pound tax liability the FSA said the firm could not pay.
However, two years before the action, the FSA outlined a catalogue of failings in IFA firms’ marketing and distribution of the Secure Income Bond (SIB) and Secure Income Plan (SIP) products.
It followed a low-key thematic review into the advice processes of some firms known to be recommending the Keydata SIB or SIP vehicles.
| Share | |
| Comment | SIPP providers reveal scale of Keydata cash black hole |
More from professional adviser
Email alerts
Recommended reading
Categories
Topics
Comments
Trustees?
I have to take issue with the comment on Trustees responsibilities. It is widely thought that when something goes wrong blame must be apportianable to someone else. Where SIPPs are concerned a trustees role is hold the asset as nominee and ensure it does not breach the HMRC taxable property rules. If the trustee is expected to vet and approve the financial viability of each and every investment, the costs to do so would enormous and in reality that is what the IFA is for. To vet and recomend the investemnt to the client. Where does this stop. Checking every equity purchase to made by a DFM. Is an insurance company responsibile to vet the investment decisions made by guest fund managers who sit on their platformn. Does a bank when loaning money for a car purchase insist on vetting the AA report on its condition? Clients need to understand if they sign up for an investment the declaration on the application will state theat they are signing having understood the terms of the investment. If they have, the buck rests with them. If they haven't understood they shouldn't have signed it.
Posted by: SIPP Defender
Related articles
Most Read
This year we have 14 awards designed to mark out the very best products in a highly competitive and innovative market. This includes three new awards for 2011 to reflect the developments in this rapidly growing market: Best Dual/Multi-Index Product, Best Structured (Oeic) Fund and Best Structured Product Provider.
Events
Poll
|
|
Job search
Ifaonlinejobs will open the right investment career path for you. Search hundreds of vacancies on www.ifaonlinejobs.co.uk now
In Focus
Traditionally, the purpose of a bank account within a pension scheme has been rather one...
Viewpoints
The relatively illiquid nature of commercial property investments within a pension could...
SIPPs are dangerous...
...in the wrong hands. They should have a wealth warning in big red letters on every piece of promotional literature. Yes another example of politicians creating a tax wrapper which is often abused by all concerned. And what were the trustees doing?
Posted by: Exasperated Me