I sympathize with your frustration with the bureaucracy of forms, and while it seems as if the financial planner in question should already have much of this information, the concept of a "complete picture" being essential to getting the best financial advice that Ryck (and joemikeb) raised seems sound to me. One doesn't go into a doctor's office with a stomach ache and refuse to allow the gall bladder, liver, pancreas, etc., to be topics of conversation.
Interesting analogy but that wouldn't happen. I know far more about our personal finances than I do about human physiology.
What's been left out of this discussion are the details of the particular questions your OH took to the financial planner. Perhaps the nature of their discussion raised issues outside the scope of the pension plan that needed some additional information to address properly?
I've dealt with the other issues raised in their discussion, in my letter, and explained why no intervention on the part of the financial planner is necessary at this point in time.
As with doctors, you are free to either cooperate or not with your financial advisor as you see fit, though they might not want to keep you as a client. I'll be interested to hear the response you get to your letter.
They might not want to keep us as clients? That's ok too. The world is full of financial advisors and there is one right here in town which would be considerably more convenient that one retained for historical reasons 200 miles away.
In fact, it would suit me much better. I'd get the guy round here and show him all the files. Good Idea, thanks!
