Rebecca O’Connor
Your last chance to get tickets to Top Gear Live
You would think it is impossible for an investment linked to the stock market to plummet at the same time as the market rallies. But this is exactly what has happened to the value of with-profits policies held by millions of homeowners and pension savers.
Since 2003, when the stock market began to recover from the bursting of the bubble in technology shares, with-profits policies have slumped. Despite this week’s stock market jitters, the FTSE all-share index has enjoyed gains of about 100 per cent since March 2003. The maturity values of with-profits policies has fallen by an average of 45 per cent over the same period. This fall in values has left thousands of homeowners who bought endowments without the means to pay off their mortgages.
In 2003 the average maturity value of a 20-year with-profits policy, started with a one-off investment of £10,000, was £111,901, according to a survey by Money Management magazine. Now the same amount invested over 20 years is worth only £61,903.
When you invest in a with-profits fund, the cash is pooled with other investors’ money. The pooled cash is invested on the stock market in a mixture of shares, bonds and cash. Each year the insurance company running the fund declares bonuses, or the amount of money to be added to the policy. Annual bonuses add guaranteed amounts each year to the value of a policy, while the terminal bonuses that make maturity values look high are paid only at the discretion of the insurer.
The idea is that a with-profits fund smoothes stock market fluctuations by withholding some profit in good years and paying out extra in the bad times.
The problem with the products now lies in the way in which the with-profits funds are invested. Traditionally, between 70 per cent and 80 per cent of a fund was invested in equities and property and the remainder in less-risky bonds. But between 2002 and 2003, before the market began to improve, many insurers reduced their exposure to equities and property to about 20 per cent to 30 per cent. At the same time, they increased the amount of the funds invested in bonds. When the upturn came, the with-profits funds missed out.
Justin Modray, of Bestinvest, the independent financial adviser, says: “They cut back on equities and property right on the cusp of a boom. In terms of timing, this is exactly what you don’t want to do.”
Bonus announcements this year have also shown that some strong funds, such as Legal & General, Liverpool Victoria and Prudential, are showing good underlying growth. But that strong performance is still not feeding though to maturity values.
Large numbers of funds are closed to new business. The performance of these “zombie” funds has been poor. This is partly because they were closed in the first place for being financially weak. A weak fund cannot afford to take the risks of a high equity holding.
The rush to close with-profits funds to new business, and today’s continued poor performance, has its roots in the past of the with-profits funds. When times were good, they paid out too much. When times were bad, there was too little left in the pot to avoid the poorly timed switch away from equities.
Kim North, managing director of Techonology and Technical, a financial services con-sultancy, says: “Actuaries have different methods for calculating how much extra to pay out in lean times and how much to withhold during periods of good performance. They are looking to produce an overall consistent return over the term and their strategies vary from company to company, which is why there are such massive discrepancies and payouts look poor relative to stock market performance now.”
With uninspiring annual bonuses, investors’ policies that are still some way off maturity are relying on better terminal bonuses. Mr Modray says: “While payouts on maturity have been falling, prospects are improving thanks to stock market performance. But this is in the lap of the gods and impossible to predict.”
CASE STUDY: Higher repayments the safest policy
Keith and Carole Lynn, of Ashford, Kent, face the prospect of a £25,000 shortfall on their Standard Life endowment, which was projected to pay out £50,000 at the end of the term on their £90,000 mortgage.
The Lynns, pictured with their children, Christian and Naomi, are proceeding with a compensation claim, but with ten years left on the loan, Mr Lynn, a 40-year-old business development consultant, is not taking any chances. Each time the couple remortgage, they increase the amount of the loan they are repaying by £5,000 so the endowment, which costs £64.50 a month, now has to achieve only £40,000 to clear the loan. The mortgage repayments are currently £611 a month on a two-year Alliance & Leicester tracker.
Keith says: “We are slowly chipping away at the loan but will continue to pay into the endowment plan. We now look at it as a standalone investment rather than a way of paying off the mortgage.”
Endowment shortfall action plan The sooner you address any shortfall the better, even if you are expecting to receive compensation for mis-selling. James Cotton, of London & Country Mortgages, the broker, says: “If you have a shortfall, do not assume that a nice compensation cheque will sort it out. There is a danger of focusing too much on the mis-selling and the potential for compensation rather than taking remedial action.”
Borrowers should steer clear of making additional payments into a poorly performing endowment. Mr Cotton says: “This is like throwing good money after bad”.
You can make your payments into an alternative investment product, such as an Isa. However, there is no guarantee that the returns on an invesmtent Isa will grow sufficiently to repay the loan.
You can cash in the endowment policy or sell it on the secondhand endowment market and use the proceeds towards paying off the mortgage.
Careful consideration is required before deciding whether to encash or sell an endowment. The best options depend on the performance of the policy, how long is left until maturity, any penalties for surrendering and any additional benefits for keeping it, such as life insurance. Mr Cotton says: “There is no simple answer. For instance, if you get rid of a policy that includes life cover, this may mean having to find replacement cover, which could be costly.”
The safest way to repair a shortfall is to switch the outstanding mortgage from interest-only to repayment. For example, imagine you have a £10,000 shortfall on a £50,000 loan with an interest rate of 5.25 per cent. You have five years to go until the endowment matures. The switch from interest-only payments of £218.75 to capital repayments of £364.86 would cost an extra £146.11 a month but would repair the shortfall by the end of the term.
If you have a poor mortgage deal, switching to capital repayments on a more competitive deal will pay for itself. For instance, someone with a shortfall of £10,000 on a £50,000 loan at 7.25 per cent with ten years to go is paying £302 a month. Byremortgaging to Leek United Building Society’s lifetime tracker at a rate of 5.33 per cent and switching £10,000 to a repayment deal, the monthly payments would drop to £285.
Another option is to make make regular overpayments on your mortgage. Most lenders allow overpayments of up to 10 per cent of the loan size each year without penalty. Some fully flexible deals allow unlimited overpayments for those that can afford to make even bigger contributions, although this usually come with a higher rate. On a £50,000 interest-only loan at a rate of 5.25 per cent with five years until the endowment matures, overpayments of £200 a month would reduce the balance by about £13,700, leaving you with £36,300 left to pay. If you can afford to overpay by £400 a month, the balance would fall by £27,400, leaving £22,600 to pay.
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
2007
£30,000
2008
£44,990
2008
£48,489
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
Some of the finest Apts & Penthouses
Across London
Great Investment, River Views
Luxury properties within exclusive development in
Chislehurst Kent
A new experience in Luxury Living
Multi–Centre
from Only £829pp
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - search houses for sale and rooms and property to rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
What other industry rewards itself with massive profits (Resolution\Phoenix 395 million) while maintaining massive loses for its shoddy insurance products. Resolution should take a cut in its charges and return the money it took from the-with-profits to pay for the mis selling compensation claims.
Fund management charges should be linked to the profits it makes for its policyholders, (business model) That way they have an incentive to manage the fund to the benefit of the policyholders and not just the shareholders.
The only way forward is for the governance of these funds via an independent 'with-profits-committee'(WPC) where the majority of the vote is held externally from the company board. It was proposed by the Treasury select committee 2004 and again by the FSCP (Financial services consumer protection) recently. The FSA regulated for it, then back tracked because of pressure by the insurance companies. They should have had the balls to insist on the WPC independence.
eugene fenwick, Bracknell, Uk
If you ask me, 'with profit funds' have never been very good.
Investing in Standard Life or Friends Provident to name but a few, is a very risky business.
I have never made anything but a loss on these policies.
Thats why I avoid them like the plague.
John, Newport,
It's all very well for castigating the life companies for selling equities at the bottom of the market and buying gilts and bonds at the top, but they did so, not by choice, but because they were forced to by the FSA
howard horne, Portsmouth,
Waiting for the terminal bonus is a risky thing in itself. There is nothing you can do if your endowment holder decides to shave the terminal bonus when the policy matures or even to take it away altogether. Current final bonus rates can vary dramatically and unpredictably from year to year, even in consecutive years. Writing to the company for an explanation only gets you a gobbledegook reply. The Finacial Ombudsman Service cannot challenge their impenetrable actuarial calculations. I know because I have tried.
Bernard Quoroll, Guildford, Surrey
It is all very well stating the problem, this mis-management of the funds is well known to those of us who have received bonus payments of 0% and 0.5% for the past four years, with precious little for a few years before that. We have seen the insurance companies rip us off whilst declaring profits averaging 10% (Norwich Union) for the past four years. Richard Harvey of Norwich Union took £2 million in salary and bonus last year alone. He retires in April with a pension of over £500,000 a year and I dread to think what his lump sum will be. This is just one director and there are many more.
What we need is for the Times to champion the cause of the endowment policy holders and to help them get justice, not tell us to save more in order to pay off the mortgage.
Rod Cooke, Kirby Cane, Norfolk England
We all know about the mis-selling fiasco on endowment mortgages, what we will now have is a mis-management fiasco on the policies. I think that this should also be questioned. Are they deliberately managing the funds to the disadvantage of the investor?
Mike Carr, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia