OK thanks. I am shocked that for this one we could get away with saying consult a financial adviser as that seems a cop-out. That doesn't look like adequately answering the question to me of "how they should decide on whether one is right for them". It's just offloading it to the financial adviser & besides it would be up to the financial adviser to know about these options already.
Furthermore isn't it misleading to provide so many facts and figures and expect us to ignore them all and say "consult a financial adviser". I reckon most people would spend precious time at least trying to figure out if the question's data suggests an obvious message to be communicated.
I think people would end up disappointed with the presentation in the solution since it just gives one example, which may not be relevant or correct to them. It could seriously mislead if they think the arguments made apply to pension pots regardless of size & lump sum taken.
I thought the test in CA3 was that to communicate a clear message. Unfortunately to get to it you sometimes have to do some digging or extra calcs, ignoring the distractions and irrelevant information in the question. For me, this question does not have that clear message waiting to be communicated & requires way too much analysis and calcs.
Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2016