Client feedback


Ever increasing regulation has placed a heavy burden on trustees both in terms of time and the risk of non-compliance. PSGS has the experience and the resources to help trustees manage these burdens.
Mark Atkinson,
Partner at CMS Cameron McKenna
Excellent and comprehensive training course. I will definitely refer to what I've learned and received.
Kyp Kyprianou,
Bam Construction UK Ltd
​We are extremely pleased with the appointment we made. The way Ian reacts to us and works with us is brilliant. We are very happy.
Katherine Cross,
Tyser
We chose PSGS because of the experience of the team and the feel of the relationship seemed the right fit.
Paul Staniland,
Chair of Governance Committee, Kier Group Pension Trustees
​Ian has added more value than we thought he would at the start… which shows it pays to go with someone who is doing the job of a professional trustee as their bread and butter.
Katherine Cross,
Tyser
Stuart is a very experienced and good leader and certainly has met expectations.
Christopher MacFarlane ,
Bristow Group

Will a simple administrative oversight hamper your investment decision making?

Topic:

Legal & governance

Date published:

Wednesday, 3 September 2014

It is easy to think that making an investment decision is the hardest part. Recently, for a number of pension schemes, it is implementing that decision that has been most problematic. What makes it worse is the cause of the issue is a simple admin task.

Following the well publicised departure of several key members of investment teams at both Barings and Standard Life, many trustee boards recently took the decision quickly to move out of certain investment funds. Some of those schemes, including our own clients, were able to act swiftly and move out of the relevant fund at the earliest opportunity. Others were not so fortunate.

Having spoken to a number of advisers last week, it seems the differentiating factor is the authorised signatories list. Where the list is out of date, some schemes are experiencing significant difficulties in organising the signatures needed to implement the decision - and this represents a very real risk to the trustees.

On appointment, a new trustee should be asked promptly to provide any anti-money laundering information needed, and arrangements should be made for them to be added to fund mandates. A good scheme secretary will make sure this happens, as well as regularly checking the signatory list remains up-to-date. As we have seen in recent days, failing to do this simple task impedes trustees’ ability to act swiftly, which could result in a financial loss to the scheme.

Gillian Graham - Scheme Manager

 

 

Back to opinions

 

Hot topics


PSGS & 20-20 Trustees merge to form Vidett
Hot Topic

Punter Southall Governance Services (PSGS) & 20-20 Trustees (20-20) have today announced they...

Read more »


Don’t be surprised that your gilt funds are being treated like an emerging market
Image of Hot Topic author Sophia Harrison, Client Director

You may have seen or heard about the article in the Financial Times about how Insight...

Read more »


More opinions »


Call: 0118 207 2900

online enquiry