With the significant rise in demand for DB pension transfers since the introduction of the pension freedoms, it is no surprise that the regulator, the FCA, is watching and warning advice firms to ensure they do a good job.

However DB pension transfers are a highly specialist, complex and high risk area of advice for both the individual pension member and the advice firm.

It requires a firm to have not only pension qualified advisers but also advisers who are experienced at providing this type of advice and that they have an extensive and robust process that looks beyond just the projected yield numbers.

Interestingly, if an adviser makes a recommendation to a client which the client disregards, is it a conflict of interest if the adviser is then prepared to make the transfer for the client anyway?

Consider a patient visiting a doctor complaining of a sore arm. The doctor after conducting various tests proclaims it a muscle strain and recommends rest. The patient insists the doctor amputate the arm for fear it is cancerous. If the doctor were to amputate what would be your view of their professionalism and ethics and what would be your view if the doctor refused to amputate?

In the context of DB pension transfers the term "insistent cases" is where a client wishes to make the transfer despite the adviser's recommendation that the client should not.

If a firm is prepared to transfer insistent cases then this must put in question the firm's faith in its own advice and its professionalism and ethics.