The €2.2bn pension fund of insurer Delta Lloyd has been declared the best pension fund with an average or final salary defined benefit plan in the Netherlands.The prize was presented during the first Pension Funds Awards organised by the joint venture of pensions magazine IP Nederland and the Financieele Dagblad (FD).The Delta Lloyd scheme was selected for its high returns and low costs, as well as its reinsurance arrangements, which enable the pension fund to avoid cutting pension rights.Protector, the pension fund for ExxonMobile companies in the Netherlands, came in second place. The pension fund of the Belgian bank KBC won the prize for best defined contribution plan, which guarantees a minimum return on investments. The pension scheme of ABN Amro bank won the award for best investment policy, owing to its “clear strategy in aiming for a balance between preventing rights cuts and its indexation target”.The KLM pension fund for cabin staff and PNO Media achieved a joint first place in the category of client focus.PNO won an award for its website, while the KLM scheme received an award for its cross-media approach.The railways scheme (SPF), the pension fund for public transport (SPOV) and pensions insurer Swiss Life jointly won the prize for best long-term investment, due to their investments in a fund providing financing to small and medium-sized enterprises in developing markets.During the awards ceremony, IP Nederland and the FD announced that they would continue their cooperation under the new name FD Pensioen Pro IPE.
The MNRPF was closed in deficit as the remaining sponsors created a deficit reduction plan looking to eliminate the underfunding by 2007.However, external economic circumstances prevented this, leaving the 40 to seek assistance from former 210 sponsors during a two-year legal dispute ending in 2011. The Court ruled in favour of the 40 leaving the trustee of the scheme to create a complex actuarial model for deficit funding for all sponsors.Mrs Justice Asplin ruled after a one-month hearing at the end of 2014 and said the trustees of the pension fund could introduce the new contribution regime to address the scheme deficit.“I am happy to approve the proposed exercise of the power of amendment in the form which has been put before the Court,” she said in her judgement. “It seems to me that the trustee dealt with this matter in a meticulous manner and sought all relevant and proper advice upon which it quite properly relied.”Asplin said the trustee work did not exceed the scope of its powers and had not taken any irrelevant matters into consideration.She said it was unfortunate the regime had suffered “wide-ranging criticism” but added it was inevitable given the commercial interests at hand for the former sponsors.The trustees took the model to the High Court and were opposed by five former sponsoring employers of the MNRPF including shipping giants P&O Ferries and Stena Line.The trustee’s success was supported by law firm Mayer Brown on both the creation of the regime and in court litigation.Chairman of the MNRPF, Edmund Brookes, said members and sponsoring employers could take comfort the new regime has been subjected to legal scrutiny.“All involved in the MNRPF can take comfort from the Judge’s comments, which were very supportive of the process we went through in making our decisions,” he said.“The trustee anticipates shortly starting the process of formally introducing the new deficit contribution regime.”The judgement also clarified rules surrounding the inter-relationship between trust law’s stance of acting in a member’s ‘best interest’ while also creating reasonable outcomes for sponsoring employers.Counter-arguments against the regime said the trustee acted outside of its powers and the ‘best interest’ rule by giving the 40 sponsors credit in the new regime for deficit contributions since 2001, as this only benefited those employers and not members.However, Asplin said the ‘best interest’ principle was not a standalone point and that the trustee was allowed to account for an employer’s interest if the primary purpose of providing pensions was being furthered.Burges Salmon, who acted on behalf of member representatives and P&O Ferries, warned: “This judgement will now result in trustees coming under increasing pressure from employers to take their interests into account.“They can no longer simply rely on the argument they are obliged to act in the best interests of members.” The Merchant Navy Ratings Pension Fund (MNRPF) has won a High Court battle over a deficit contribution model, allowing it to collect funding from around 210 former sponsors.The multi-employer defined benefit scheme for naval ratings, subordinates to officers, has a deficit near £500m (€682m) but has only seen 40 of its roughly 250 former sponsors contribute to the deficit regime since it closed to future accrual in 2001.A UK High Court judge ruled in favour of a trustee regime allowing it to collect deficit reduction payments from all former sponsors of the fund.It relates back to when the 30,000-member scheme closed to future accrual in 2001, when only 40 employers still had actively accruing members within the scheme.
“EU-level guarantees should be coupled with some protection against risks from retroactive policy changes since this risk, according to our experience, increases with worsening macroeconomic conditions,” the paper says.“This should also cover renationalisation risk.”Retroactive changes to the regulatory framework have seen pension funds burned by renewable projects, with a number of Danish schemes – including PensionDanmark – in 2010 challenging the Spanish government over changes to solar feed-in tarrifs.For its part, pension asset manager APG previously cited uncertainty over feed-in tariffs as one of the reasons it was reluctant to invest in Dutch off-shore wind power projects – a stance it changed earlier this week.It also recommended infrastructure projects be aggregated as a way of diversifying the risk to investors, echoing earlier comments by IIGCC chairman Donald MacDonald.On a member state level, the investor coalition urged governments to draft industrial strategies setting out how each country would transition to a low-carbon economy, with development banks boosting the EFSI’s fire-power by contributing to the fund.Philippe Desfosses, chief executive of ERAFP, which contributed to the IIGCC’s paper, argued that institutions could play a greater role than at present in funding infrastructure projects.“Many investors have fallen short of their target allocations to infrastructure and can invest more,” he said.“We want to invest more, but we need the right policies.”Read Stephanie Pfeifer’s thoughts on what oil companies can do to manage climate risk,WebsitesWe are not responsible for the content of external sitesLink to IIGCC’s paper ‘Achieving the Investment Plan for Europe’s €315bn ambition’ The European Commission must prevent retroactive changes to EU member states’ renewable energy policies if it wishes its €315bn investment plan to succeed, a €10trn coalition of asset managers and pension funds has argued.The Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) also proposed that all projects funded by the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) comply with a “robust” set of sustainability criteria, with all high-carbon projects automatically excluded from consideration.Stephanie Pfeifer, the IIGCC’s chief executive, said president Jean-Claude Juncker’s plan had the potential to “usher in a new era of low-carbon infrastructure investment ” and proposed a number of changes to achieve this.The IIGCC’s paper, authored with input from investors including French civil service pension scheme ERAFP, PensionDanmark, PGGM and the UK’s Universities Superannuation Scheme, argued that the Commission needed to play a greater role in designing renewable energy policies, as changes still posed a significant risk.
Denmark’s Sampension has made a big hire this month from Nordea, bringing in vital skills from the banking industry to boost its direct lending investments.The DKK257bn (€34bn) labour-market pension fund appointed Theis Nygaard in the newly created role of credit portfolio manager.The pension fund lured Nygaard from his job in Copenhagen at Nordic and Baltic bank Nordea, where he was chief dealer and head of derivatives structuring.Nygaard took up his new role at Sampension on 1 July. Kasper Ullegård, head of fixed income at the pension fund, told IPE: “He will be joining us to enhance our focus on credit.”With the toughening of the regulatory environment for banks in the wake of the global financial crisis, banks are more constrained in their ability to lend, which has created an investment opportunity for pension funds, he said.“For the macro economy to grow, companies need to go somewhere else to find another source of lending, and a natural place for them to go is towards life insurance companies and pension funds,” he said.“Hence, we see a growing role for us to deliver lending to the corporate sector directly. However, we don’t have the same experience as the banks.”To be better prepared for that future environment, Sampension hired Nygaard to strengthen its activities and competences within credit.Ullegård said Nygaard had strong experience and skills in structuring financing and was well acquainted with the documentation needs of lending and the involvement of lawyers.“There are a lot of details we are much less involved in when we buy a listed product,” he said.He said Nygaard also brought with him strong product knowledge and was therefore able, for example, to price callability features of a direct lending deal, allowing the borrower to repay the borrowing earlier than maturity.Sampension already has direct lending investment deals in the pipeline, although it declined to provide further details.“We have done what our current staffing allows us to do, but we would like to do more,” Ullegård said.“It gives us the opportunity to save some costs and benefit from illiquidity premiums.”In April 2014, Sampension was one of five Danish pension funds forming a group to invest DKK3.6bn in commercial real estate loans in Western Europe with AXA Real Estate.Last year, pension fund PenSam expanded its staffing levels in the area of direct lending.
Nearly two-thirds of the $10.3trn of assets covered by the survey were held by public pension reserve funds ($6.6trn), an increase of 6.2% on average between 2013 and 2014.“Sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) and public pension reserve funds (PPRFs),” the OECD said, “are becoming major players in international financial markets.”One of the survey’s findings is that, “although funds surveyed are of a different nature, [there is] a clear trend in alternative assets”.Large pension funds’ allocation to alternatives, which includes infrastructure, increased on average from 14.3% of total assets in 2010 to 15.3% in 2014, according to the survey report.“The trend in alternatives is even stronger among PPRFs,” it said.On average, at the 19 funds that submitted data over the past four years, average allocations to alternatives increased from 11.2% in 2011 to 13.5% in 2014.The report notes that some PPRFs can only invest in fixed income but says, “what is noteworthy is that, for those funds that have the ability to set long-term policy targets, portfolios have drifted towards alternatives”.It adds: “Funds able to maintain a long-term view on liquidity of reserve assets have responded by increasing return-seeking assets.”Indeed, France’s €36.3bn national pension reserve fund, the Fonds de Réserve pour les Retraites (FRR), is working hard to implement a fresh €2bn allocation to French illiquid assets after the government gave it permission to invest beyond 2024.According to the OECD, the survey showed that large pension funds have lowered equity allocations in favour of alternatives, although PPRF allocations to equities increased alongside growth in alternatives allocations, while fixed income exposure declined.Infrastructure, meanwhile, is drawing growing interest from pension fund managers, but the survey results show a low level of investment on average, according to the OECD.For the 77 funds that returned questionnaires, infrastructure investment in the form of unlisted equity and debt was $85.6bn in 2014, representing 1.1% of the total assets under management.The pace of the increase in infrastructure allocation has slowed over the past few years at 23 funds that reported their allocation over the 2010-14 period, according to the survey report, “indicating that funds have not been able to grow their infrastructure allocations”.In terms of preferred strategies, the report notes that there is a preference for brownfield assets but also increased return appetite in relation to construction risk, pushing investors “to acquire the expertise to be able to provide creditor oversight on new-build construction”.It also cites increasing interest among investors beyond core infrastructure, in what is considered value-added brownfield opportunities.PGGM, the €183m Dutch asset manager, last year told IPE it would like to expand in the area between infrastructure and private equity if there is interest from pension funds; assets pursued under this strategy would likely be non-core infrastructure holdings.Direct investment remains the most common method for funds to gain exposure to infrastructure, according to the report.Another noteworthy trend, according to the OECD, is that, among the funds that reported green investments, there was “a general increase” in the amount of pension funds that invest in green bonds, as well as in the relative size of their allocations.It said four pension funds in Sweden – Alecta, AP2, AP3, and AP4 – all increased allocations to green bonds in 2014 and that Spain’s Santander reported green bond exposure for the first time in 2015, amounting to 1.1% of the total portfolio.AP2 recently announced it was going to establish a standalone green bond portfolio, saying the market had matured enough for the bond type to be declared an asset class.,WebsitesWe are not responsible for the content of external sitesLink to OECD survey report Large pension funds and public pension reserve funds have clearly increased their allocation to alternatives, especially the latter if they are free from investment restrictions, according to an OECD survey of nearly 100 funds. An increase in green bonds investment was among other trends reported. Every year since 2011, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has carried out a survey of some of the largest institutional investors in the world.Its 2015 survey reviews trends in assets and asset allocation by 99 large pension funds and public pension reserve funds with $10.3trn (€9.1trn) in assets under management in 2014.
IPE editor Liam Kennedy highlights five consequences of today’s Brexit vote for European pensionsThe political and economic ramifications of the UK electorate’s decision to leave the EU are wide-ranging. The effect on Gilts, sterling and equity markets was immediate in the aftermath of the referendum. But it may take time before many of the less palatable consequences become evident for institutional investors in the UK and beyond. Here are five consequences of Brexit for them to consider.The downgrading of the UK’s sovereign credit rating will have an uncertain effect on wider investor demand for Gilts, even though Gilt yields fell immediately after the referendum result. While the longer-term economic picture might not be so good for the UK, higher bond yields would conversely benefit funds by boosting funding ratios. For many, this would be a Pyrrhic victory given the evident political and economic downsides of Brexit.There are wider long-term implications and uncertainties for UK funds and pensions policy given the focus on EU freedom of movement in the referendum. Any attempts by a future government to curb European migration would not only have implications for future demographics at a macro level but also for the membership structure of funds at a micro level.Longer-term uncertainty will also be corrosive for the UK as an investment destination for areas like property given the uncertain trading relationship with the EU and the outlook for financial services. Investors from outside the UK are likely to pause their investment decisions – if they had not done so already before the referendum – as they assess the investment case. If banks relocate activities to elsewhere in the EU, for instance, prime property in the City of London of Canary Wharf becomes less attractive.Financial and pensions legislation itself becomes more complicated because it is uncertain whether the UK will have to follow the rules of the single market in the future. For instance, it is uncertain whether the UK Parliament will need to implement the new IORP II Directive. Given that financial and insurance services contributed £127bn (€166bn) to the UK economy in 2014, or 8% of gross value added, and many UK companies have significant EU operations, Britain is likely to want to continue to have access to the single market in financial services.Since the Pittsburgh G20 conference of 2009, the EU has become one the world’s two chief initiators for financial stability legislation together with the US. So the EU’s decisions will affect the UK’s banks, insurers and pension funds with or without the UK’s participation. The current Juncker Commission’s focus is on the Capital Markets Union, involving a radical restructuring of financing and lending for Europe’s long-term economy. But Britain may find itself following the rules and participating in structures over which it has no political voice. For many in the EU, it is baffling that the country, which contributed so much to single market financial legislation over the years, will no longer be involved in the political and legislative process.
A trio of pension fund associations have advised the European Commission against taking a prescriptive approach to the consideration of environmental, social, or governance (ESG) factors by pension funds.Dutch and German bodies along with the Europe-wide representative association agreed that relevant investment entities should consider sustainability factors in their investment decision-making, but argued that decisions related to sustainability should be left to the pension funds rather than prescribed by law.The industry bodies were responding to a Commission consultation on “institutional investors’ and asset managers’ duties regarding sustainability”, launched following recommendations from the High Level Expert Group (HLEG) on sustainable finance.This group is expected to publish its final report on Wednesday. PensionsEurope, the European umbrella body for occupational pension funds, aba, the German occupational pension fund association, and Pensioenfederatie, the equivalent Dutch body, submitted responses to the Commission’s consultation. Developing an overarching EU strategy on sustainable finance is part of the Commission’s Capital Markets Union projectaba’s response was the most strongly worded.It said it “strongly argues against an EU-wide definition of specific ESG filtering criteria” because “the ultimate choice of criteria is heavily influenced by individual values and moral concepts”.“Determining how ESG goals can best be achieved should be left up to the [pension funds],” added aba.“aba opposes any obligation for IORPs to include ESG criteria in business or investment decisions.”aba, Germany’s occupational pension fund associationaba added that a universally shared EU-wide understanding of ESG was “inconceivable”.“Accordingly, a fixed definition or predefined catalogue would not be a viable solution,” it said.Elsewhere in the consultation, aba said it was against any obligation for IORPs – occupational pension funds in the language of the European Union – to include ESG criteria in business or investment decisions.“Setting ESG objectives should remain voluntary,” it said.PensionsEurope, meanwhile, said that pension funds would increasingly need to address societal expectations on responsible investment, but that “a prescriptive, mandatory approach would not be able to take account of [the] diversity of existing approaches”.“There should be room for pension funds to prioritise and focus on specific sustainability issues in their investment decision-making,” it added.If any legislation were to be introduced at the EU level, pension funds would strongly prefer principles-based rules without reliance on delegated and implementing acts, it said.The Dutch Pension Federation said it would not be desirable if detailed rules were developed at the European level in the area of sustainability and ESG factors.“We do not believe in prescriptive measures set by the EU,” it said.It also said both the Dutch government and the pension sector paid a lot of attention to this subject. Considering sustainability was compatible with delivering a good pension to members, which was paramount for pension funds, the federation said. Also, in the Netherlands it was already mandatory for pension funds to report on how they take account of the environment, climate, human rights and social relations in their investment policy.“We do not believe in prescriptive measures set by the EU.”Dutch Pensions FederationPensionsEurope made a similar point, noting that in its view the “modern” understanding of fiduciary duty did not prevent pension funds from addressing sustainability risks where these were considered to pose material financial risks.It said the revised IORP Directive clarified that Member States should allow pension funds to take into account the potential long-term impact of investment decisions on ESG factors within the prudent person rule.In its introduction to the consultation, the Commission said the duties of care, loyalty and prudence were embedded in the EU financial legal framework, but it appeared unclear that they required institutional investors and asset managers to assess the materiality of sustainability risks.Its consultation was intended to help the Commission “gather and analyse the necessary evidence to determine possible action to improve the assessment and integration of sustainability factors in the relevant investment entities’ decision-making process”.Disagreement over beneficiary inputThere was a clear difference of opinion among the three associations over the question of the role of beneficiaries in influencing pension funds’ practice with respect to responsible investment, with PensionsEurope and aba against a requirement to consult members. The Dutch Pensions Federation was in favour.PensionsEurope said that some pension funds consulted beneficiaries regarding their preferences, but “we strongly feel that these initiatives should not be required by EU regulation but remain voluntary or fall under national requirements”.aba said that the primary goal of any IORP was to continuously fulfil and meet the expected or promised [pension] benefit by choosing an adequate, risk-controlled investment policy. ESG criteria were only one factor to be considered within the investment process, with the sponsor’s own ESG policy also informing this.“aba therefore opposes yearly or semi-annual surveys among beneficiaries and their preferences regarding ESG,” the association said. “This would hardly be achievable at reasonable cost.”According to the Dutch Pension Federation, however, pension providers should consult their beneficiaries in relation to sustainability issues because they “should know what their beneficiaries find important”.
Italian industry pension fund Previdenza Cooperativa has launched a tender process to select asset managers for two of its investment options, to handle total assets worth around €1.6bn.The Rome-based fund, which has €2bn in total assets under management, said it intended to issue eight mandates in all for its balanced and dynamic saving options, which have assets under management of around €1.4bn and €175m respectively.For external management behind Previdenza Cooperativa’s balanced option, the pension fund has tendered for four global multi-asset bond mandates of approximately €240m each, one total return global bond mandate for an estimated €240m, and one global equity mandate for an estimated €140m.The tenders for the fund’s dynamic option, meanwhile, involve two global multi-asset equity mandates for approximately €85m each. Previdenza Cooperativa said proposals must be submitted by 1pm central European time on 1 August. Any additional information can be found on its website, with any requests for further information to be sent by midday on 24 July.Telecoms fund eyes private debt, private equity allocationsThe Italian pension fund for the telecoms sector has launched a search for two investment managers to take on private debt and private equity mandates.Fondo Telemaco is seeking one manager for a private debt mandate worth an indicative amount of €55m within its Prudent savings option, with the contract lasting 10 years. The fund said the aim for this mandate was for a manager to achieve a net cash multiple greater than 1.4.The pension fund is also seeking a manager for a €50m private equity mandate within its Balanced option. The mandate’s stated aim is to invest in European private equity funds, with appropriate portfolio diversification and active management. Fondo Telemaco said the contract would have a duration of 12 years and and aimed to achieve a net cash multiple of greater than 1.8.The fund’s €1.9bn total assets are split into three investment sub-funds: Guaranteed, Prudent and Balanced.Solidarietà Veneto awards mandates to Groupama and EurizonItalian multi-employer pension fund Solidarietà Veneto has selected external managers for two of its investment options.Following a tender process conducted for its Income (Reddito) and Prudent investment lines, the Venice-based pension fund chose Groupama and Eurizon respectively to manage the two mandates. Contracts with Mediobanca SGR and Candriam respectively had come to an end, the pension fund said.Both new partners have worked with Solidarietà Veneto in the past in various ways.Almost €300m was invested in the Income investment line at the end of May 2019, according to data on the pension fund’s website, while the Prudent line had around €643m under management.Solidarietà Veneto managed €1.4bn at the end of May.
He told IPE: “We will be a very important partnership for the 13 partnerships overall, and we expect to have a very close dialogue with the other partnerships in order to avoid silo thinking.”What financial institutions can do within their own businesses to limit greenhouse gas emissions is relatively small, he said, involving greening the power in their data centres, for example. Their main role will be, he said, in putting together finance and funding for the complete programmes developed by the other partnerships.“Our primary task will be to consider such questions as how can we support a programme for energy efficiency in existing buildings, how can we help shipping industries in their efforts to move to electrofuels, how we can help farm products move onto a more sustainable path, and how can we create more green infrastructure such as wind farms,” he said.The work of the finance climate partnership will be coordinated by the industry associations Insurance & Pension Denmark (IPD), Finance Denmark, the Ministry of Business Affairs and the Ministry of Climate and Energy.“We have a hard deadline of the end of February by which time we are expected to have published our first roadmap with concrete proposals, and in September or October we will have to deliver the final report and action plan,” said Möger Pedersen.PensionDanmark is very honoured to have been asked to chair the finance partnership, he added.“It reflects the fact that we have been in many ways a first mover when it comes to developing sustainable investments,” he said, citing the pension fund’s programme for developing sustainable real estate and its infrastructure investment in renewable energy such as wind farms.Danish pension funds already have a good starting point in this climate-orientated work, he said, as they are heavily engaged in the agenda.The country’s major pension funds made a very strong climate commitment in September at the 2019 United Nations Climate Summit in New York, he said, where they pledged alongside the government to invest an extra DKK350bn (€46.8bn) before 2030 to support the green transition.“It will be real estate, infrastructure, and also though the exercise of active ownership that Danish pension funds will play a role in climate change mitigation,” he said. Torben Möger Pedersen, the chief executive officer of PensionDanmark, has been tasked with chairing one of 13 new climate partnerships the Social Democrat-led Danish government has set up to achieve its ambitious new climate target.The government of Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, who took office at the end of June, has set a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Denmark by 70% in relation to 1990 levels by 2030.Frederiksen unveiled the climate partnerships and their chairs last week. The partnerships represent all branches of Danish business and are to define how each sector can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and propose concrete solutions.Möger Pedersen has been appointed chair of the finance partnership.
A Queenslander in Aumuller St PICTURE: ANNA ROGERSTHIS fixer upper is a house flipper’s dream, provided you have a flat bed truck or two and some handy capital. The 95sq m Queenslander on 127 Aumuller St, Bungalow, was built in 1960 and whoever buys it needs to move it.Rohan Murphy of DTE demolitions said interest was peaking about the Queenslander – an iconic style that is becoming harder and harder to find.“There has been quite a lot of interest,” Mr Murphy said.“It is warming up a lot as far as interest goes in relocating a Queenslander.”He said renovation TV shows had inspired a wave of house flippers hoping to cash in on the appeal of the traditional northern home.“Over the last five years there has been your Back Yard Blitz and The Block, it has been a renovating decade,” Mr Murphy said. A Queenslander in Aumuller St PICTURE: ANNA ROGERS“It takes six to 10 weeks,” Mr Murphy said.“You need to put a building application to Council. It is no different a process to a new house build.”But for those with the gumption and the know-how, it’s a steal with true Cairns appeal.“Queenslanders have so much character,” Mr Murphy said.“This one is good to move because you don’t have to cut up the house.“To move locally and bring it up to code and do everything required will cost something like $50,000 to $65,000.“It seems too good to be true but you need to have capital in the bank.”Inquiries can be directed to DTE demolitions on 4035 2555. A Queenslander in Aumuller St PICTURE: ANNA ROGERS“You need a lot of capital and go in not afraid of hard work.”The two bed and one bath residence has a solid structure but will need more than a lick of paint. The house has a rusty tin roof, requires a fit out, cleaning and yes, a paint job.It is a gem in the rough for anyone willing to take on the challenge.“Some people continually move them – they move two houses a year and can make $100,000, but that only works if there is an appreciable market,” Mr Murphy said.“The ones that have moved a few keep going and sweep them up.”The house features timber flooring upstairs, vertical joint tongue and groove board walls and a cosy kitchen space with plenty of ventilation.More from newsCairns home ticks popular internet search terms2 days agoTen auction results from ‘active’ weekend in Cairns2 days agoA staircase leads into the living area from downstairs.He warned the project was not one to be taken on by the unwary.“It is a bit of a trap for somebody to get caught up in a dinner party and think ‘wow we can do it’ and off they go,” Mr Murphy said.“You need flexibility. If you have big enough gonads and have a go at it, it’s not bad but you need to have capital.”If you are salivating at the idea of whacking the vintage house on a handy flat bed, you may need to curb your enthusiasm for a moment.