STM, AllTrust, Pathlines, Praxis

Why Trustee Choice Became Decisive Overnight

Before the collapse of Brite Advisors, trustees were largely invisible to clients. They existed in the background, providing structure and compliance while advisers and platforms drove decision-making.

That balance no longer exists.

In a post-failure environment, trustees move to the centre of control. Their legal obligations expand, their risk tolerance contracts, and their willingness to permit discretionary action drops sharply. What was once routine becomes exceptional.

This is why two individuals with superficially similar Brite pensions can now face completely different outcomes, purely based on who their trustee is.

The Trustee’s Real Role In A Receivership Environment

Trustees are not neutral administrators. They are fiduciaries with legal obligations that intensify during periods of uncertainty.

In a receivership context, trustees must:

• Protect member interests collectively, not individually
• Avoid actions that could prejudice court-led processes
• Limit exposure to regulatory or litigation risk
• Vet advisers more strictly
• Document every decision defensively

This creates a culture of caution that advisers must respect. Any strategy that assumes trustee flexibility is likely to fail.

Why Trustee Behaviour Varies So Widely

A common misconception is that trustees follow the same rules across the board. In reality, trustee behaviour is shaped by:

• Jurisdiction and regulator expectations
• Historical involvement with affected schemes
• Litigation and complaint exposure
• Internal risk appetite
• Operational capacity

These factors differ materially between STM, AllTrust, Pathlines and Praxis, which explains why outcomes diverge so sharply.

Stm: Complexity Amplified By Cross-Border Exposure

STM appears frequently in Brite-related structures, particularly where international or QROPS arrangements were involved.

STM’s current approach reflects:

• Heightened sensitivity to regulatory scrutiny
• Conservative treatment of frozen or restricted assets
• Strict adviser vetting processes
• Reluctance to facilitate discretionary transfers

For clients, this means that even when transfers are theoretically possible, they are often operationally slow and tightly controlled.

For advisers, this means that credibility, experience, and regulatory alignment are prerequisites, not advantages.

Alltrust: Structure, Caution, And Limited Tolerance For Deviation

AllTrust has inherited a significant number of Brite-linked pensions, often through complex administrative histories.

Their operating style is characterised by:

• Strong internal governance frameworks
• Rigorous adviser due diligence
• Conservative interpretation of receivership boundaries
• Limited appetite for mid-process restructuring

In practice, this means that advisers promising swift exits or workaround strategies are likely operating outside AllTrust’s actual policies.

AllTrust tends to prioritise procedural correctness over speed, which can frustrate clients but reduces long-term risk.

{{INSET-CTA-1}}

Pathlines: Legacy Complexity And Constrained Flexibility

Pathlines occupies a particularly challenging position. Its historical evolution and inherited structures create layers of complexity that affect decision-making today.

Key features include:

• Legacy scheme obligations
• Historical complaints exposure
• Heightened sensitivity to partial transfers
• Strong documentation requirements

Clients under Pathlines often face slower progress, not due to inaction, but due to the need for meticulous compliance at every step.

Praxis: Professionalism Within Defined Limits

Praxis is often perceived as operationally efficient, but that efficiency exists within clearly defined limits.

Praxis typically:

• Applies structured decision frameworks
• Maintains tight control over adviser relationships
• Requires clear justification for non-standard actions
• Prioritises clarity over speed

This makes Praxis predictable, but not permissive. Advisers must work within established pathways rather than attempting bespoke solutions.

Why Adviser Acceptance Is Now A Gating Factor

One of the most misunderstood realities post-Brite is that trustee acceptance of an adviser is no longer assumed.

Trustees increasingly require:

• Proof of regulatory permissions aligned with client residency
• Demonstrated experience with frozen assets
• Clean compliance histories
• Clear scope definitions

An adviser rejected by a trustee cannot progress a case, regardless of the quality of their strategy.

How Trustee Choice Affects Transfer Feasibility

Transfer feasibility is no longer determined solely by pension type. It is shaped by trustee policy.

Trustees may:

• Allow partial transfers but block full transfers
• Permit adviser changes but restrict asset movement
• Require receivership milestones before action
• Limit receiving schemes to approved lists

Understanding these nuances prevents wasted time and false expectations.

Trustees And Tax Risk: The Silent Interaction

Trustees do not provide tax advice, but their decisions often create tax consequences.

Examples include:

• Timing of distributions
• Forced crystallisation events
• Jurisdictional reporting triggers
• Asset reclassification

An adviser who does not anticipate these interactions exposes clients to unnecessary risk.

Why Trustee Strategy Must Come Before Product Strategy

A common mistake is designing an ideal end-state solution without first understanding trustee constraints.

Effective planning works in reverse:

1. Understand trustee permissions
2. Map realistic timelines
3. Identify tax risk windows
4. Select viable destination structures
5. Execute incrementally

Skipping steps leads to stalled cases and frustrated clients.

How Skybound Works Within Trustee Realities

At Skybound, trustee constraints are treated as design parameters, not obstacles.

Our approach involves:

• Early trustee analysis
• Conservative assumption setting
• Sequenced execution planning
• Clear client communication
• Continuous reassessment

This reduces friction, preserves optionality, and avoids dead ends.

Why Trustee Awareness Separates Outcomes Post-Brite

Ultimately, trustee behaviour explains why some Brite clients make progress while others remain stuck.

The difference is rarely urgency or effort. It is understanding.

Understanding who controls what.
Understanding when action is permitted.
Understanding which advisers can actually operate.