Police pension can i cash it in

billchecker1

I am not trying to convince anyone. There are always two sides to a story. Our federation are simply too weak willed to defend us or our rights.


Have no idea on what operation alice is? Does it relate to police pensions?


I am staying in the pension as it is still a good pension. That doesn't mean I cant feel aggrieved of having them stolen from us by the government.


Not sure why I am annoying you or anyone else for that matter? I have been polite and given answers in a succinct evidence based format.

mgdavid

billchecker1 wrote: »

There has been no agreement so that doesnt come into it.

I suspect there has.
Pensions are part of an employment contract.
Contract changes can be proposed by the employer with reasonable notice.
You either agree to the revised contract or you refuse to agree in which case you leave the employement. If you stay, you have agreed.

jamesd

billchecker1 wrote: »

This is what I am doing at the moment.

Together with my police pension I am putting money into a S+S ISA for a joint total of 20% of my gross salary.

I really cant afford to put more in at the moment.

I also need to sort out the OHs pension provision at some point!

To be honest age isn't the issue for me. Im more than happy to work till 60 or even 65. But will be able to is the question? It is a physically demanding job and a new test is being introduced which im sure will make it harder for people to get to the retirement age. Fingers crossed.

Good to read that you both recognise that it's still a good deal and are doing something about it.

One thing you might want to consider is setting up a second account here to ask about the overall planning for yourself and your OH, just saying that you have a DC pension and what the amount and normal retirement age are, without mentioning your job. That way you'll know that the comments aren't specific to the job and hopefully if you steer clear of negative comments about changes yourself it'll stay more fully productive without the non-personal planning aspects getting into the mixture.

Do you happen to have a pointer to some background information on the police test? I know about the firefighter one and that seems to me like a raw deal for many in that line of work, given what just getting older does to aerobic fitness capability. At least like you they have the option of putting money away and taking it at normal retirement age, but still, it's not great IMO to have a pension with a normal retirement age older than many of the employees will be known to be physically capable of passing the test.

jimi_man

billchecker1 wrote: »

There has been no agreement so that doesnt come into it.

The Police Federation agreed to it. They also took legal advice which was that the legislation was not worth the paper it was written on (rightly so, legislation that binds govts like that is inherently bad legislation). They've also recently stated that there will be no challenge to Sec 2 by them.

That's pretty much agreeing to it.

billchecker1

Our federation told us that they had no right to even negotiate the changes much less agree or disagree.

I repeat. Nobody agreed with this.

The federation put up no fight whatsoever.

All legislation binds governments. Whether written in the 1970s or not.

In fact the majority of statute law that we rely upon to day was written decades if not centuries ago. Google offences against the person act.

billchecker1

Jamesd. Thanks again for your post.

I really need to dig into the detail of my wife's pension. She is on lgps. Which is changing soon I believe.

I will post once I have some more info. I think I will probably use the same username. I'm proud of what I do and see no need to hide due to other peoples ignorance.

rpc

billchecker1 wrote: »

That doesn't mean I cant feel aggrieved of having them stolen from us by the government.

If something has been stolen, I'd have thought the police would be the best placed people to investigate.

billchecker1 wrote: »

I repeat. Nobody agreed with this.

The police have (effectively) a collective bargaining arrangement don't they? In those circumstances it doesn't take individuals to agree or disagree.

The federation put up no fight whatsoever.

So you did agree, collectively at least.

All legislation binds governments. Whether written in the 1970s or not.

And all legislation can be repealed or amended. There lies the rub for a statutory basis for occupational pensions. There are probably more binding ways to do it, as grand as a pension enshrined in statute sounds.

Perelandra

billchecker1 wrote: »

All legislation binds governments. Whether written in the 1970s or not.

Very little UK legislation binds future governments- almost everything can be "undone" if a future government wishes to rewrite the laws- parliamentary sovereignty.

atush

Do you happen to have a pointer to some background information on the police test?

We saw the police test admistered the other week on BBC news. Many took it (incl some older gentlemen) and didn't find it hard.

I really need to dig into the detail of my wife's pension. She is on lgps. Which is changing soon I believe.

There are important things to learn about the LGPS, in that their AVCs can be used to pay the TFLS instead of commuting valuable pension to give one. This is a good deal and should be looked into. But she'll still need S&S isas if she wants to retire early instead of losing pension thru actuarial reduction.

operation Alice is the name of the police inquiry into the Police federation trying to stich up Andrew Mitchell. Surprised there is a serving officer anywhere in the UK that hasn't heard of it?

You annoy me by insisting no one agreed to the changes. When the answer to the agreement is in posts 73 and 75. If you stay you have agreed.

Freecall

billchecker1 wrote: »

Have no idea on what operation alice is? Does it relate to police pensions?

This has to be a wind up.

Please tell me it is or I might cry.