Pension transfer delays and administrative barriers are undermining trust in the UK pensions system, Penfold co-founder and CEO, Chris Eastwood, has warned, amid growing scrutiny of so-called 'sludge tactics'.

The comments come as a national debate over pension transfer practices has intensified, with growing public support for a legally enforceable 10-day guarantee to switch pensions.

Industry data suggested that while average transfer times stood at around 10-12 days, this masked inconsistencies, with some providers completing transfers in under four days while others took more than a month.

More complex cases can take between 30 and 50 days or longer.

Consumer experience reflected these disparities, with previous research showing that 46 per cent of savers who attempted to transfer a pension found the process difficult.

Eastwood argued that such delays were not driven by technical limitations but by outdated systems and behaviours within the industry.

“Too many pension providers still rely on outdated processes that make it unnecessarily hard for customers to move their own money,” he said.

“These delays aren’t a technical inevitability, but rather the result of systems and behaviours that prioritise asset retention over customer choice.”

He suggested that while some providers have demonstrated that efficient transfers are achievable, others continue to impose unnecessary barriers, including mandatory phone calls, duplicated forms and repeated identity checks, which can lead to delays or abandoned transfers.

“When one provider can complete a transfer in under four days while another takes over a month, it suggests the problem is industry attitude, not technical complexity," Eastwood said.

“The industry has had ample time to modernise, and yet savers are still being made to wait, chase and navigate friction that simply shouldn’t exist.”

His concerns were echoed in a recent report on the current state of the pension transfer system, which concluded it was “not fit for purpose” and holding back the potential economic benefits of digital pension platforms.

Meanwhile, the issue is further compounded by the growing number of lost pension pots, which now total more than £31bn, according to data from the Pensions Policy Institute.

Eastwood warned that administrative friction was discouraging consolidation and contributing to disengagement among savers.

He also emphasised the importance of enabling customer choice, arguing that providers should not rely on barriers to retain assets.

“Trust is earned by giving people genuine choice, not by trapping them through paperwork or delays,” he stressed.

Looking ahead, Eastwood suggested that the forthcoming pensions dashboards could "expose" providers clinging to outdated practices.

"Savers will be able to see, in black and white, who is holding up their transfers,” he stated.

He added that while a transfer guarantee would be a good start, it needed "real teeth" in the form of legislation and consequences for non-compliance.

“That means a single digital process, providers being required to honour completed customer instructions, and meaningful penalties when transfers are unnecessarily delayed," he said.

“The more examples we highlight, the harder it becomes for the worst practices to hide behind jargon and process.”

---