NS&I ILSCs: consolidating

[yorkshirelad1]

Still struggling with NS&I and thought I'd post here in case anyone had any insight or experience or wisdom (there's usually lots here!)

Am sole exor for my mother's estate. She had some (22) index-linked savings certificates (ILSCs). ILSC can be passed on intact to beneficiaries. There are two, possibly three beneficiaries, and they would like to inherit the ILSCs intact. Ideally, it would be most practical (save a lot of work) to consolidate the 22 ILSCs into two ILSCs for the two beneficiares (they already hold some ILSCs in their own right). However, NS&I no longer permit splitting or consolidating, which is not very helpful. I know that ILSC are now considered old hat by NS&I and haven't been on sale for new customers for ages and have different terms, rates, and inflation-measures but they're still around and held by many customers as long-term savings. When doing a bit of research for these thoughts, I stumbled across this which made interesting reading:
https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/treasury/Correspondence/2017-19/nsi-follow-up-040618.pdf

I am currently (finally) talking to someone as NS&I who understands the situation and isn't reading from a script and clearly wants to help resolve.

Ideally, I'd like to consolidate all 22 ILSCs into two. Has anyone done this recently (for a deceased estate or otherwise). Would it be so difficult for NS&I to nominally cash in all certificates and allocate to two ILSCs of the currently available issue for matured rollover certificates for a chosen term?

NS&I seem unable to consolidate or split, and it seems very embedded ("it's the rules") into their banking systems since they put new processes in place in 2012. I'm tempted to try and push this up a level (ombudsman, MP?) to see if this can get some airtime, as I can't be the only person in this position and I'm told there are some clients with 100s of "accounts" (which is what individual ILSCc are now described as) which might make sense to be able to consolidate. It must be such an administrative overhead (esp those not on e-mail who will be receive annual paper statements) to have customers with large numbers of accounts, who might be willing to consolidate some or all; and it might even save some costs (heaven forbid!) and paper. NS&I are able to change their rules (e.g. to shift from RPI to CPI) so their rules are not completely set in stone. It's quite tricky getting to talk to anyone within NS&I who might have some insight and some influence but I'm getting closer. I'm sure there are pros and cons to the consolidate or not matter, but it would nice to hear both sides of NS&I's views on this matter as well.

All comments, suggestions welcome.
TIA

(posted to uk.legal.moderated this week as well and ideas from there fed in here)

[Chrysalis]

I can’t comment on inheritance issues, but I have ILSCs. These were bought in three separate tranches and obviously have different maturity dates, so roll over at different dates into whatever deal is on offer at that time. I get one written statement listing all the certificates, with their maturity dates, I can view them online at any time, and I think I also get an annual interest statement.
I don’t find managing three tranches complicated or difficult. I don’t really see how ‘consolidating’ would work practically, given that the certificates mature at different dates. You wouldn’t expect two fixed term bank accounts to be able to be ‘consolidated’ into one account would you?
I personally think it is fantastic that you can inherit the ILSCs and continue to own them - I wasn’t aware of that and I am surprised - again, you wouldn’t expect to be able to inherit a 5 year fixed rate deposit account and retain the old terms and conditions.
So my advice would be, be grateful for being able to inherit the certificates, accept that consolidating isn’t available, and move on.

(Probably not what you want to hear, but looking in from the outside, I am not convinced this is a ‘problem’ worthy of expending a lot of your precious time and energy! Unless I’ve completely misunderstood something)

[mutantpoodle]

surely the solution is to allocate sufficient 'bonds' (accounts as now called) to each beneficiary as be of approximate same value to each.
whether one receives 15 and other 7 cannot be important?

if the beneficiaries wish to retain the bonds then differing maturity dates should not matter as 'rollovers' will arrive in due course

if it is then ..........bequests have been badly selected! imo

[yorkshirelad1]

I can’t comment on inheritance issues, but I have ILSCs. These were bought in three separate tranches and obviously have different maturity dates, so roll over at different dates into whatever deal is on offer at that time. I get one written statement listing all the certificates, with their maturity dates, I can view them online at any time, and I think I also get an annual interest statement.
I don’t find managing three tranches complicated or difficult. I don’t really see how ‘consolidating’ would work practically, given that the certificates mature at different dates. You wouldn’t expect two fixed term bank accounts to be able to be ‘consolidated’ into one account would you?
I personally think it is fantastic that you can inherit the ILSCs and continue to own them - I wasn’t aware of that and I am surprised - again, you wouldn’t expect to be able to inherit a 5 year fixed rate deposit account and retain the old terms and conditions.
So my advice would be, be grateful for being able to inherit the certificates, accept that consolidating isn’t available, and move on.

(Probably not what you want to hear, but looking in from the outside, I am not convinced this is a ‘problem’ worthy of expending a lot of your precious time and energy! Unless I’ve completely misunderstood something)

Thanks for the reply and useful thoughts, probably not what I was aiming for but still valid. FWIW, it used to be possible (before 2012) to consolidate certificates. At the time, I amalgamated several clusters of 4 or 5 ILCSs (approx value ~£50) which has subsequently saved a fair bit of admin, and paperwork at the time (although now I'm on e-mail). It is possible to cash in ILSCs during their term, but there is an interest penalty, although the penalty for early encashment doesn't apply to death claims. You're probably correct that there are more important things to worry about, but it's worth a punt. I try and keep admin/paperwork to a minimum so that I have time to think about the bigger things and don't clutter my desk/inbox/head with unnecessary admin. I also understand that there are ILSC clients who have 100s of "accounts" as ILSCs are now known, and if those clients haven't moved to e-mail that's a lot of paperwork and admin, esp as NS&I now issue yearly anniversary documents as well as plenty of paper at the start and end. You'd have thought that NS&I would want to aim for reducing paper and admin, so could offer a moratorium, but it does not seem like there's not enough overall oversight within NS&I to create this sort of initiative, and it seems like ILSCs have been pensioned off, and been made to look unattractive.

[yorkshirelad1]

surely the solution is to allocate sufficient 'bonds' (accounts as now called) to each beneficiary as be of approximate same value to each.
whether one receives 15 and other 7 cannot be important?

if the beneficiaries wish to retain the bonds then differing maturity dates should not matter as 'rollovers' will arrive in due course

if it is then ..........bequests have been badly selected! imo

Useful thoughts. Thank you. I'm aiming to pass over the majority of the ILSCs between the two beneficiaries as equally as possible, and cash in the few remainder small ILSCs and divide the cash to redress any imbalance in the division of the ILSCs so overall it's as equal division of the total as possible.

[AJC5001]

I'm aiming to pass over the majority of the ILSCs between the two beneficiaries as equally as possible, and cash in the few remainder small ILSCs and divide the cash to redress any imbalance in the division of the ILSCs so overall it's as equal division of the total as possible.

Have you asked the two beneficiaries what they intend doing with the certificates? If all they will do is to cash them in, then doing that yourself and giving them the cash would seem to solve the problem.

Adrian

[pochisoldi]

I'm aiming to pass over the majority of the ILSCs between the two beneficiaries as equally as possible, and cash in the few remainder small ILSCs and divide the cash to redress any imbalance in the division of the ILSCs so overall it's as equal division of the total as possible.

Have you asked the two beneficiaries what they intend doing with the certificates? If all they will do is to cash them in, then doing that yourself and giving them the cash would seem to solve the problem.

Adrian

Another alternative is to speak to the beneficiaries, and see if one of them would rather pay money into the estate in order to receive the "indivisible ILSC" to avoid cashing in any holding.

For example. 5 holdings of £100 each totalling £250 each. The 5th holding won't split.
Beneficiary A has £50 spare, and wouldn't mind putting it into ILSCs (but they aren't on sale) so they pay £50 to the estate, and receive 3x£100 in ILSCs
Beneficiary B is just happy to get £250, so they get paid 2x£200 in ILSCs, plus £50 cash.

Both get £250 net, Beneficiary A is happy* to take advantage of the situation and boost their tax free savings. Beneficiary B is just happy * t get £250.
(* - in the circumstances).