Will new S Pension cause resentment?

badmemory wrote: »

And I guess the "no longer retire for another 6 years" should actually read another 1 year. Unless of course you like so many others were illiterate until they hit their late fifties.

No, i meant what i wrote.

Maybe i should write "effect" rather than "affect" as i'm illiterate?

I can't believe someone thanked your post.

ipri wrote: »

He has a superannuation pension NHS...like me.

Your wires are getting cross then - assuming he was in the NHS scheme for the majority of his time working here, then his state pension will very likely be the protected amount under the old rules, since under the new rules it would be a lot less given all the contracting-out.

Or, in other words - you're confusing the 2016 changes with those made nearly a decade before which reduced the number of qualifying years for a full basic state pension to 30. Even then he wouldn't be getting the new single tier however, just what he would got before...

fredandwilma wrote: »

I belong to the group of people who were hit the hardest by the last pension reforms.

That would make you a man.

The reason men are most affected by the recent change is that the year added to state pension ages affects men more because men's life expectancies are usually lower than women's. As a result the average effect is men receiving a larger reduction in their lifetime sate pension payments than women.

fredandwilma wrote: »

I can no longer retire for another 6 years, (collect my state pension)

But that would imply that you are a woman, not a man, so were not among the group most badly affected by the recent change. Except that a life limiting condition which means you expect not to reach state pension age makes that moot for you whether you're a man, woman or neither.

There was an earlier change due to gender discrimination cases compelling a change in law and just the plain injustice fixing of unequal state pension ages between men and women. That one dates from 1995 and provided for the state pension age for women to be gradually increased between April 2010 and April 2020. We're in that equalisation timeframe now, with the inequality between men and women in state pension age gradually being removed. There was a very extensive information campaign in the mass media and even personal statements with the new ages sent to everyone affected, using the latest address information held by HMRC. Changes were made faster along with a further delay with the 2010 Act, though there was a substantial and costly slowing down of the rate for many women compared to the original proposal.

fredandwilma wrote: »

I would love to be in receipt of my state pension which would have been around the £276 a week stated.

You're not affected at all by the change that the original post here was about. That's the change from a state pension linked to earnings to a flat rate one at about £155 a week maximum, however many years a person works. Those entitled to more under the older rules like you continue to get the older rules level.

You would get the full flat rate with triple lock and the extra above the flat rate cap level will be inflation-linked only. This is a higher amount covered by the triple lock than before, it used to be only the lower basic state pension portion, so you actually could expect a higher overall state pension than previously if you were going to live long enough for it to matter.

If you were working during 2015-16 your state pension level won't be available until around November or December this year because that's when the 2015-16 earnings are included. If you weren't working that year the ones now should be OK.

Sorry to read about your life limiting illness and I hope that yours progresses as well as possible so that you can enjoy your remaining time as much as possible.

Once the foundation amounts from April 2016 are calculated there won't be any old rules calculations, except for things like correcting mistakes. That doesn't matter because the old rules calculation is one of the two used to get to the foundation amount, old rules and new rules, you get the higher of the two calculations. Then from 6 April 2016 it's just the new rules used to calculate increases beyond the foundation amount.

The inflation only increases to the portion above the flat rate cap is what will gradually reduce the value of amounts above the flat rate. But this isn't any extra loss because that's also the inflation linking used under the old rules.

Sadly life does have some curve balls. Best we can do is wish you well and hope that we get less unfortunate curve balls heading in our own directions.