Flat Rate Pension one year earlier - April 2016

BLB53

If they'd really wanted to get it right they should have perhaps set a lower pension level.

It would make no sense to set the flat rate state pension at a lower level - the reason it is £144 is to be above the means tested level for pension credit.

FWIW, I think the government have made a pretty good effort at getting the balance right on the new pensions. Everyone knows something needed to be done for years and the nettle needed to be grasped - obviously there will be winners and losers - I think the people entitled to be most aggrieved are those reaching state pension age before 2016 who remain on the old system and who are not entitled to pension credit.

Stargazer57

oliver1950 wrote: »

In order to qualify for the additional pension you had to be both contracted in to that scheme and earning sufficient to qualify. I didn't qualify.

This I will get the basic £107 and no more. I have some savings which means I can't qualify for the pension credit.

You still haven't said why you only qualify for a very small S2P. If you were self-employed for 40 years I can see why you might think there is some inequity, but the number of people in this position is very small so your petition isn't going to get very far. There will be a lot more people who don't get much S2P because they were contracted out, but in their case the contracted out pension will be taken into account in determining the new pension, so the inequity doesn't arise.

gadgetmind

oliver1950 wrote: »

I did read the green paper, I didn't respond. The system is complex, but it works.

No, I'm not sure it did. Many people didn't have a clue what they would be getting, how it interacted with benefits and other pensions, nor how to get the best out of the system

The new system is a breath of fresh air and is a much-needed overhaul. OK, so some might complain that they don't benefit from the new flat rate, but they have been free to use contracting out, SERPs/S2P, etc, to boost their pension income so have little to complain about in reality.

The object of reform should be to simplify, but it has not done that.

Going forwards, it does, very much so.

however as a principle I do believe that governments should aim to be equitable and fair.

You're entirely free to believe whatever you like but you must understand that such words are a moveable feast when applied to pensions, taxation, and much more. I'd rather deal in more concrete and deterministic concepts myself.

One of the key reasons for reform, was affordability.

That was part of it, but it was mainly about simplification and removing means testing so that people wouldn't lose out if/when they made their own provision.

If they'd really wanted to get it right they should have perhaps set a lower pension level.

Fine by me as long as both NI and tax were drastically reduced too. I'm no fan of Big Government nor the nanny state myself.

kuepper

xylophone wrote: »

See http://www.yourpension.org.uk/Files/Files/In%20The%20Scheme/5.%20GMPGuide240211.pdf

Obtain a pension statement https://www.gov.uk/state-pension-statement

Thanks

this is getting like alice in wonderland, curiouser and curiouser! I'm not sure if I was part of that Local Gov scheme as I thought local schemes had autonomy but it shows how little attention I paid at the time. Will be on the phone to West Yorks LGPS 1st thing tomorrow to find out, so coupled with my request for a forecast I should know by the end of the week what my situation is. It's all been a real eye-opener as to how unnecessarily complicated and bewildering the system is at the moment and contrary to what IDS says it's not going to be simplified much by the changes,

jem16

kuepper wrote: »

Thanks

this is getting like alice in wonderland, curiouser and curiouser! I'm not sure if I was part of that Local Gov scheme as I thought local schemes had autonomy but it shows how little attention I paid at the time. Will be on the phone to West Yorks LGPS 1st thing tomorrow to find out, so coupled with my request for a forecast I should know by the end of the week what my situation is. It's all been a real eye-opener as to how unnecessarily complicated and bewildering the system is at the moment and contrary to what IDS says it's not going to be simplified much by the changes,

All Local Government schemes are dealt with locally but they all follow the same basic rules. For all the time you were a member of West Yorks LGPS you were contracted out.

http://www.wypf.org.uk/Index.aspx

gadgetmind

kuepper wrote: »

I should know by the end of the week what my situation is

Why has it taken so long?

it's not going to be simplified much by the changes,

Did you fully understand the previous system?

grey_gym_sock

i do think fairness is relevant to pension reform, but i haven't come to any clear conclusion about how fair these reforms (if they really are reforms) are. perhaps because i don't understand enough about them yet.

there are always going to be cut-offs, where you do better or worse depending on your exact age, so that's not clear evidence of unfairness.

the changes do seem quite advantageous to self-employed ppl, e.g. me. since the flat rate pension replaces both basic and second state pension, and we will get the flat rate in full, instead of getting the basic pension and no second pension.

gadgetmind

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

there are always going to be cut-offs, where you do better or worse depending on your exact age, so that's not clear evidence of unfairness.

Well, quite. By 2016, I'll have reached/passed the £144 via S2P and SERPs but won't then gain any benefit from paying huge amounts of NI in subsequent years. Is this fair? Who cares! What is and isn't "fair" is one of those arguments that will never end as everyone reads something different into the word and concept.

the changes do seem quite advantageous to self-employed ppl, e.g. me. since the flat rate pension replaces both basic and second state pension, and we will get the flat rate in full, instead of getting the basic pension and no second pension.

My wife, with a small amount of S2P but many years of class 2 contributions, will benefit a little. I'm sure will find a way to see this as "unfair"!

johnaka

question not answered???

Perelandra

Overall, I'm going to be much worse off by these changes (likely headed towards the £190 figure, but will now be getting £144 if I'm lucky...)

At first, I was mighty aggrieved by this, as that's a fair chunk of additional private pension I'll need to get back, but on reflection I'm going to have to be more pragmatic. I've known for ages (since I started work a couple of decades ago...) that the state pension scheme wouldn't remain affordable in my lifetime, so that I almost certainly wouldn't get the amount I could "expect" to get under the terms of the day. I guess the sooner it's changed, the less drastic the cut will need to be...

... but, of course, there's nothing to say that there aren't further changes coming along. I'm still assuming that it'll become means-tested at some point too...