Full marks on cold-call ban ... if it works

VARIOUS organisations have been quick to claim a victory for last week’s introduction of a pension cold-calling ban. Glory seekers.

Although some leading financial services industry figures have thanked me for my part in pushing for such a ban, I think the real hero has been overlooked by those seeking the plaudits.

Step forward the tenacious Darren Cooke, a chartered financial planner from Derbyshire, who more than two years ago launched a petition calling for the Government to ban cold-calling, thereby ‘cutting off the food source’ of fraudsters. Without his initiative and grittiness – spawned from a belief that consumers need protecting – I am convinced we would not be where we are today.

As a result of his work, the spotlight was suddenly shone on pension coldcalling and the often shocking financial consequences of people acting on the ‘advice’ given. In the worst cases, people were shorn of their pensions with the fraudsters never seen again. Others were hit with huge tax bills for accessing their pension early (before age 55).

Cooke’s petition gathered momentum and persuaded bigger fish such as former Pension Ministers Steve Webb and Ros Altmann to kick up a fuss, eventually resulting in the Government listening.

A ban is a bit of a misnomer because fraudsters will still be able to make cold-calls. As Cooke told me last week: ‘Murder is outlawed but that does not stop it happening.’ Slightly over the top, but you get his drift.

But what is different is that as a result of the new legislation, cold-callers now face fines of up to £500,000 from the Information Commissioner’s Office (an organisation set up to uphold information rights in the public’s interest). A penalty that may get some scammers – not all – to think twice before picking up the phone and searching for targets.

From now on, the only people allowed to ring you about pensions are your financial adviser (if you have one); someone acting on behalf of the managers or trustees overseeing your pension plan; or somebody you have already given consent to contact you.

While the new legislation represents a start in trying to wipe out pension fraud, what is more imperative is that the law is used and offenders hit with fines. Only over the coming months will we learn whether the ICO has the proverbial ‘balls’ and the resources to go after cold-callers and hold them to account.

In the meantime, anyone receiving a pension cold-call should take note of the number (if possible), put the phone down (politely or impolitely) and contact the ICO at ico.org. uk. Well done Darren. INVESTMENT fund recommendations, provided online by fund platforms, are powerful selling tools. Hence Interactive Investor’s recent launch of its ‘super 60’ list and Hargreaves Lansdown’s revamp of its ‘wealth 150’, whittling it down by two thirds to 50. According to Hargreaves, half of all funds held on its Vantage platform are wealth 50.

Last week, I reviewed the top fund lists of the major platforms in this newspaper’s Wealth section (the article can be found on sister website This is Money). I gave them ratings of up to five, based on how they are compiled and their user-friendliness. For the record, the maximum scores (four out of five) were awarded to Interactive, AJ Bell and FundExpert. Hargreaves was excluded because it had yet to release details of wealth 50 (which incidentally and rather confusingly embraces 60 funds).

Having absorbed its new offering, wealth 50 also merits a score of four. Yes, it has been criticised for omitting some top funds such as Terry Smith’s Fundsmith Equity because Smith refuses to give Hargreaves a price discount it could pass on to investors. But Hargreaves is only behaving like a big retailer does with its suppliers. If they (the suppliers) don’t play ball, it goes elsewhere. If I had any qualms, it is with the 0.45 per cent annual service charge Hargreaves imposes on investors. On the high side.

The new law is a good start in eliminating fraud – but offenders must be hit hard