Early-retirement wannabe

gadgetmind

jimi_man wrote: »

Things like brakes, steering, clutches, oil and filter changes etc, have changed little over the years and are still straightforward to do.

You need a diagnostic lead and computer to back off the parking brake the get a caliper off on my A8!

despite swapping out a Lambda unit (whatever that is)

Lambda sensor. It measures O2 ratio in exhaust and keeps engine close to stoichiometric while also keeping cat converter hot. Garage was lazy as they can be the cause of various error messages but you can see the readings from them to check they make sense.

Sometimes the diagnostic tools are useless and they need to go back to basics.

I disagree with "useless" but they inform rather than lead, with the latter being down to grey matter.

Aside from that, in general I find cars so much more reliable than even 15 years ago so you don't really need to touch stuff like that.

I like "no touch" but I also like being informed, doing my own diagnosis, and doing the work myself if it doesn't need special tools/knowledge. (Though my stock of tools and knowledge is growing!)

robin61

gadgetmind wrote: »

Me too, and a lousy chef to boot ... when I was born. Since then, I've picked up a few bits and pieces. You only learn by doing.

I always remember my Dad going to night classes to learn about car mechanics. He decided to fix our old Hillman Imp himself. Turned out he was more suited to demolition than construction. The local garage ended up having to recover the car along with half of the engine dismantled on our drive.
I take after my Dad.
If I'm honest I wouldn't relish going back to the days of my youth lying under oily old cars in the freezing cold.

mgdavid

westv wrote: »

Why do something when you can pay someone else to do it for you? Isn't retirement about relaxing? :D

Interesting how attitudes vary. Why pay for somebody else to do something you are perfectly capable of doing, given the time to research, learn and achieve. Isn't retirement about enjoying being active, without having to rush?
My boredom threshold for sitting in the sun in my own garden is about 30 minutes; if in a hot foreign country, 3 days max.

gfplux

mgdavid wrote: »

Interesting how attitudes vary. Why pay for somebody else to do something you are perfectly capable of doing, given the time to research, learn and achieve. Isn't retirement about enjoying being active, without having to rush?
My boredom threshold for sitting in the sun in my own garden is about 30 minutes; if in a hot foreign country, 3 days max.

I agree. Having been retired for some time I now have the time to research any project thoroughly. (Thank you Google)
I then choose to do or not to do subject to the required skill level.
In addition those of you not yet retired have no idea how busy it is being retired and finding time to do things is often the problem!

Acquinas

I'm 53 and my main consideration has been that, after 31 years in public service, I was just getting demoralised by terms and conditions getting worse and worse and a growing sense of the futility of much of what I was spending 50 hours a week on. My employers offered a voluntary release scheme earlier this year and, although - financially speaking at least - it felt like I was going maybe a couple of years too early, my employers (HMG) have developed a bit of form in terms of moving the goalposts in terms of their exit schemes and I basically decided that I should take the bird in the hand. So I walked away with £90k before tax, which enabled me to pay off the mortgage and all other minor debts and to fund my eldest son's post-graduate studies.

In an ideal world I would have taken my pension too. I'm one of that happy tribe who can access their pension from age 50, albeit on an actuarially-reduced basis. I made the call that I would preserve the pension for a few more years at least, in the expectation of it rising to a bit nearer to the "full" amount to which I would be eligible for at 60. So I'm still working, on a salary of about just over half of that that was on a year ago, and am now paying into another "average salary scheme" that has a normal pension age of 67. That seems a long way off.

In very, very simple terms (i.e. ignoring the impact of tax) the dilemma I face is this. If I drew my pension at about the time of my next birthday I would get about £20k a year. If I wait until I'm 60, I will get about £25k a year. So by drawing early I would have "banked" about £120k by the time I am 60. But, obviously from 60 I would be receiving £20k as opposed to £25k (i.e. £5k a year less). So, so far as I can see, it's only really worth waiting until 60 if I estimate that I am going to live beyond age 84. The thing that is stopping me is that taking even a reduced pension now would put me in the 40% tax bracket once you add that to my salary.

I've a lot of admiration for the people who have undertaken meticulous planning for 20 years or so. And, as a basic proposition, I can't argue with the basic "rule" of "spend less, save more". But policy changes and other externalities have blighted effective planning for me. Right now I'm fearful that HMG will change the goalposts regarding my preserved pension by, for instance, pushing up the minimum age to 60. The bird in the hand is calling again!

jerrysimon

In exactly the same position. Work in the PS with a DB pension. Taking my pension at 56 (now) reduces it by about 3K given I planned to leave at 58. 5K if I wait till 60 but I never planned to do that.

I am going to do it anyway as like you have worked out how much I will have draw before I am 60 and how long it would take to catch up.

Full state pension will kick in at 66.5 years anyway.

Regards

Jerry

Acquinas

That's a fair point. My sums were always that I would want/need about £2k a month in retirement, but that by going early I would be cutting that back to nearer £1500: still do-able, though a bit tighter. But of course with state pension now at about £120 a week, that would just about plug the gap once I got to 67/68. And, of course, my "new" average salary pensions would by then also be chipping in say £5k/£6k a year. So really I've only really the next 15 years or so to worry about, during which I could still do a bit of part-time work.

It's funny though. When I was in my 40s I was really focused on the £££ side of retirement and didn't really think that much about the "lifestyle" type changes. I could not envisage working 50 hours a week into my 60s and the move to the lower paid job way part of that thinking. But, to be honest, I really miss the banter from the old office and, more arrogantly, the greater power and influence that I had then. Even though I know now that I could probably pack in my current job without triggering a financial crisis, I still feel stressed by it. Part of that is not being "the boss" I think. So I suspect that the greatest personal adaptation that I need to face up to is one of mind-set as much as finance.

But the bottom line is this: I witnessed far too many former colleagues work until they were 60, retire on a full pension and end up deceased within 18 months: that's a mug's game.

mgdavid

Acquinas wrote: »

....... The thing that is stopping me is that taking even a reduced pension now would put me in the 40% tax bracket once you add that to my salary.
...........

but you could always take the pension and bung an equivalent amount of salary into a SIPP to keep yourself out of 40% tax. Any excess cash can go into ISAs.

jimi_man

mgdavid wrote: »

Interesting how attitudes vary. Why pay for somebody else to do something you are perfectly capable of doing, given the time to research, learn and achieve. Isn't retirement about enjoying being active, without having to rush?
My boredom threshold for sitting in the sun in my own garden is about 30 minutes; if in a hot foreign country, 3 days max.[/QUOTE

Agreed. Also isn't this supposed to be a money saving site? 😉

westv

jimi_man wrote: »

Also isn't this supposed to be a money saving site? 😉

Saving money is the last thing I want to do once retired.