Copy article

When Advice Makes Sense. And When it Doesn't

ended 06. August 2026

I'm writing a Times column on when it's actually worth paying for financial advice, and when it isn't. It's rooted in my own experience of being messaged daily on social media by strangers asking me what to do with their pension, their savings, their mortgage, which I'll be actively discouraging people from relying on. The piece will give readers a clear, practical way to tell the difference between a decision that needs a professional and one that doesn't.

What I need:

  • Real examples of where financial advice has demonstrably added value, ideally with figures attached. Pension drawdown above a certain pot size, defined benefit transfers, inheritance tax and pension planning ahead of the 2027 changes, anything with a tax or allowance angle.
  • Comment on sequencing risk in drawdown specifically: what it is, how advisers help clients avoid it, and any examples (anonymised is fine) of it going wrong without advice.
  • Your view on where the line sits: at what point does a financial decision genuinely justify paying a fee, versus being simple enough to work out alone?
  • Equally, examples of situations where advice is NOT necessary or proportionate, where the fee would outweigh the benefit. I want this to be balanced, not just a pitch for advice in general.
  • Any recent data on the cost of advice versus the value it adds, particularly anything more current than the well-worn ILC/Royal London wealth uplift figures.

11 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Copy

Editor
Anita Wright
Chartered Financial Planner at Ribble Wealth Management
Pensions are often the largest asset after the family home, yet only a minority of settlements include a pension sharing order. I see it too often that a financially weaker party, usually the one who stepped back from earning, is regularly offered the house in exchange for dropping any claim on the pension. It looks generous and leaves someone with no retirement income at all. Where there has been financial abuse, advice does more than model numbers. It restores access to information the other party has controlled, tests whether disclosure is complete, and gives that person an independent view rather than one filtered through a partner who has held the purse strings for years. Financial advice is invaluable where the decision is irreversible, where pension or tax rules bite, and where you cannot see the whole picture yourself.
Copy

Editor
Michelle Lawson
Director at Lawson Financial
Advice doesn't necessarily just have a financial value or benefit- it can be having an ear or knowledge and experience that you are paying a qualified individual for. With mortgages and the volatile, fluctuating rates, I have had many customers benefit from saving thousands on better interest rates between application and completion which has far out-weighed my fee. People often think that when they deal directly with a lender, they are getting advice whereas many lenders offer an information only service. The lenders will also not proactively tell you if a better rate is available to you. Lenders are only able to offer products from their own suite whereas a qualified intermediary gets a significantly broader access for providers which all have different policy, criteria and affordability assessments.
Copy

Editor
Stephen Perkins
Managing Director at Yellow Brick Mortgages
The biggest misconception is that people are paying purely for advice. In reality, the advice is only one part of the service. They're paying for confidence that one of the biggest financial transactions of their life is handled properly from beginning to end. That includes challenging assumptions, identifying risks, helping solve problems and guiding them through what can often be a stressful and complicated process.

That doesn't mean every financial decision needs an adviser. If the choice is simple and the consequences of getting it wrong are limited, paying a fee may not be proportionate. The real test isn't whether the rate you'd find yourself is close to what an adviser could get. It's whether the cost of things going wrong along the way outweighs the cost of having someone there to help prevent those problems.
Copy

Editor
Scott Gallacher
Director at Rowley Turton
Financial advice is worthwhile when the cost of getting a decision wrong could be many times greater than the fee. We saw one client nearly lose around £200,000 of tax-free cash after selecting the wrong pension option, potentially creating about £80,000 of unnecessary income tax. We have also found valuable guarantees on two £25,000 pension pots which effectively made each worth around twice as much.

Even buying an annuity can benefit from advice. Someone selecting a single-life annuity without understanding the consequences could leave their spouse financially vulnerable. Shopping around may also produce a better income than simply accepting the existing provider’s offer, particularly where health or lifestyle factors qualify for enhanced terms.

Advice is most valuable where decisions involve tax, guarantees, dependants or irreversible choices. By contrast, choosing a savings account or opening a straightforward ISA may not justify a fee.
Copy

Editor
Graham Nicoll
Financial Planner, Chartered FCSI at NCL Wealth Partners
Many financial decisions do not require advice. Regular ISA investing, straightforward mortgage life cover or combining simple pensions can often be handled through guided platforms, provided you understand the risks, charges and benefits being surrendered.
Advice becomes valuable when decisions interact. The real question is rarely “Which pension?” but “How can I retire at 55, draw a sustainable income, minimise tax, protect my family and retain flexibility?” In drawdown, poor early returns alongside withdrawals can permanently damage a portfolio; advice can help manage this through cash reserves, diversification and adaptable withdrawals.

The dividing line is complexity, consequence and reversibility, not necessarily wealth. If a mistake could create a large tax bill, sacrifice guarantees or derail long-term plans, advice may be prudent. If it is simple, low-risk and reversible, the fee may outweigh the benefit. Social-media tips are no substitute for regulated, personalised advice.
Copy

Editor
Nouran Moustafa
Practice Principal & IFA at Roxton Wealth
Advice earns its fee when the cost of one wrong decision can dwarf it. The line is not a magic pension size; it is complexity, tax and irreversibility. A £500,000 drawdown pot falling 20%, followed by a £25,000 withdrawal, is left at £375,000. The same income now requires 6.7% a year. That is sequencing risk: poor returns early in retirement can permanently damage sustainability. An adviser can use cash reserves, flexible withdrawals and tax planning instead of selling after a fall.

Advice is particularly valuable for drawdown, DB transfers, inheritance-tax planning and the 2027 pension changes. It is rarely proportionate for choosing a cash ISA, comparing savings rates or building an emergency fund; free guidance may be enough. Vanguard’s 2025 UK research estimates good advice may add up to, or exceed, 3% in net returns, but its greatest value is often preventing one expensive, irreversible mistake. Social media can explain the rules; it cannot tell a stranger what to do.
Copy

Editor
Mark Alexander
Founder at Property118.com
One area where paying for specialist advice can deliver an exceptional return is inheritance tax planning. Small changes made years in advance can preserve hundreds of thousands of pounds for future generations, whereas leaving it too late can severely limit the options. We recently explored this on Property118 in our article What you might not know about Inheritance Tax and Whole of Life insurance, which explains why timing and planning matter far more than simply buying financial products. What you might not know about Inheritance Tax and Whole of Life insurance⁠
Copy

Editor
David Stirling
Independent Financial Adviser at Mint Wealth
The question is not whether financial advice is worth paying for, but whether your specific dilemma is complex enough, large enough or irreversible enough to justify the fee. Opening an ISA or picking an index fund does not require a professional. Paying someone several hundred pounds to tell you to maximise your allowances is not advice. It is an expensive way to be told something Google could have managed.

The calculation changes when the decision cannot be undone. Defined benefit transfers, drawdown sequencing, navigating the pension and inheritance tax interaction ahead of the 2027 rule changes. These are decisions where the gap between good and bad outcomes is not marginal. It is frequently six figures. Sequencing risk alone, the danger that poor early returns in retirement permanently damage a portfolio in a way no subsequent recovery repairs, has ended more comfortable retirements than people realise. The fee is not the question. The cost of not paying it is.
Copy

Editor
Harvey Dhillon
Founder & CEO at Zmartly
Pay for advice when the decision cannot be undone, and do it yourself when the answer is already printed on gov.uk. I say that as someone who charges fees. Part of the line is drawn for you: a scheme must check you took advice from an FCA-authorised adviser before it will move a defined benefit pension worth more than £30,000. Tax marks the rest. From 6 April 2027 most unused pension money will count in your estate for inheritance tax, charged at 40 per cent above the tax-free band. A £100,000 pot could carry £40,000 of tax that did not exist before. That is worth a fee. Filling in a form is not, and nor is paying every year for advice you only needed once. Marriage Allowance is one free claim on gov.uk, worth up to £252 a year to a couple. Never hand a firm a cut of a refund you can claim yourself. Sequencing risk in drawdown is an adviser's subject, not mine, and I have no fresher cost-against-value data. Ask what the fee buys. A judgement, or a form.
Copy

Editor
Paul Denley
CEO at Oakham Wealth Management
There's a paradox in personal finance. The people who can least afford mistakes are often the least able to pay for advice, while those who can most easily absorb errors are often families whose wealth has become sufficiently complex that professional investment management can add the greatest value.
If you're building wealth, the priority isn't paying someone to manage it; it's avoiding the big mistakes: chasing meme stocks, selling at the bottom of a bear market or making costly tax errors. Many people must rely on family, friends, or their own research - Google or AI.
But as wealth grows, the challenge changes. Multiple accounts, jurisdictions, and tax considerations mean investing becomes as much about managing complexity as it is about investing. For the asset rich but time poor, professional investment management earns its keep through judgement, discipline, and experience - and ultimately the peace of mind that comes from knowing someone they trust is watching over their wealth.
Copy

Editor
Guy Skinner
Financial Planner and Director at Citygate Financial Planning
It's justified paying a fee when the potential downside risk is greater than the fee. And often the most value a family will benefit from is when they are at a point of vulnerability. Moving money is usually in advance of, or post a transition in life. Ideally, the relationship with a trusted adviser would have started years prior, so there is speed (as often important) and dependable support

Where guidance would be best (at most) is with simple regular contributions to savings and investments which don't carry tax considerations. That said, if the general public aren't educated about seemingly simple matters, such as, creating an expenditure plan (avoiding the "B" word) emergency funds, appropriate protection, interpreting workplace benefits and more, then there is a place for a fee. I've helped two terminally ill clients claim life insurance pay-outs they and their family needed and recover the benefit through their employee benefits. What fee is that worth?