Has anyone any experience of using Preferred Pension

hyubh

DaveMcG wrote: »

His claims about the single tier seem to be broadly correct imo. Someone retiring in 2016 who has been contracted out all their working life will not get £144, they will get £113.

The headline is 'Millions will be worse off from the single-tier pension scheme', not 'millions will get less than full "flat" rate'.

Millions will be worse off, but that's younger people who would have been contracted in (not out) and potentially be earning more SERPS/SSP than 'flat' rate pension they will instead earn.

DaveMcG

jamesd wrote: »

That would be no different from what they would get under the current rules, since they get the higher of the current or new rules calculation as their foundation amount in 2016. No reduction at all due to the single tier in that case.

I really don't think it's helpful being exceptionally pedantic over an article that gets across the message that many people aren't going to get £144pw retiring after 2016. Tho obviously "Millions will be worse off than Steve Webb claimed" would be more accurate.

The government presumably for political reasons (and the mainstream press) have given the impression that the state pension is increasing to £144 pw in 2016. Occasional press articles comment that the majority won't get this amount initially and then lapse back to the "increase to £144pw" party line in their next piece.

I can only imagine the stink when NI contributions increase and this is described as a sudden revelation of "stealth tax hidden in the small print" by some ace reporter.

jamesd

It's not just an article, it's also a financial services firm making a public demonstration of its level of knowledge. Pointing out flaws in what was written is what we're here to do when a poster asks for thoughts on the firm, as Little Miss Cornshucks did in her opening post on this topic. So I gave my view on the firm, with examples of why I came to that view.

I agree with you that there's plenty that will harm people in the single tier scheme but that page did a particularly poor job of identifying the correct people who will lose out, mainly those who are not close to state pension age and who didn't opt out, with the biggest losers being those who spend a whole and full working life in the single tier system.

zagfles

DaveMcG wrote: »

I really don't think it's helpful being exceptionally pedantic over an article that gets across the message that many people aren't going to get £144pw retiring after 2016. Tho obviously "Millions will be worse off than Steve Webb claimed" would be more accurate.

The government presumably for political reasons (and the mainstream press) have given the impression that the state pension is increasing to £144 pw in 2016. Occasional press articles comment that the majority won't get this amount initially and then lapse back to the "increase to £144pw" party line in their next piece.

This is already turning into a complete PR disaster for the govt. We've had existing pensioners on here almost hysterical, up in arms that they're going to miss out on the new "higher" state pension, oblivious to the fact that their contracted out occupational scheme would have reduced the single tier, or that they wouldn't have got their SERPS on top.

We've had people who reach SPA shortly after April 2016 complaining about the contracted out deduction, they really thought they'd get the contracted out pension plus the full single tier.

And no doubt we'll have a load of clueless whingers in a couple of years complaining about a trivial 1.4% rise in NI while (in the case of public sector at least) getting the benefit of the same occupational pension as before despite their employer losing the NI rebates, plus getting credits towards the full single tier - all of which make it an excellent deal for them.

While the real losers, mainly the young, are completely oblivious to it all!

kidmugsy

zagfles wrote: »

We've had existing pensioners on here almost hysterical

That's default mode for many pensioners, alas.

zagfles wrote: »

And no doubt we'll have a load of clueless whingers in a couple of years complaining about ...

And for many non-pensioners

zagfles wrote: »

in the case of public sector at least getting the benefit of the same occupational pension as before despite their employer losing the NI rebates, plus getting credits towards the full single tier - all of which make it an excellent deal for them.

Since it was the brilliantly misnamed "public sector" that designed the changes, it's hardly a surprise that the scoundrels did well out of them.

zagfles wrote: »

While the real losers, mainly the young, are completely oblivious to it all!

That's almost a definition of being young, isn't it?