MSE News: David Cameron - We will give pensioners security and dignity

redux

redhairedwrinklie wrote: »

You have to admire [!] his effrontery. Does he realise how many sensible people - and amongst them how many existing pensioners - read Martin's weekly email etc?

Some people below have asked for an analysis: I would recommend you go to the National Pensioners' Convention website and seek a document written by Neil Duncan Jordan which provides exactly that; you will see a scathing analysis of the new scheme and its effect particularly on existing pensioners. And how can the new scheme be really good even for "new" pensioners when the Government's own figures show that the pensions bill will be much lower by 2050?

Thanks for the suggestion about reading material.

That last sentence you've written answers anyone who wonders about the real motives behind the changes.

There are borderlines between PR and bare faced lying. Sometimes it's very tricky to see where they actually are. Highlight a good point in the hope people won't spot the bad ones ...

redux

mgdavid wrote: »

good grief, where have you been for the last n years? How have you managed your pension planning previously?

What do you mean?

People are obliged to pay national insurance contributions. They might assume that things will get there in the end, and don't necessarily need to keep a continuous running check.

There are some variations possible though. I know for example that one past employer never paid across the income tax and national insurance contributions he deducted from pay, so that makes him a thief. I was rather surprised that neither the Inland Revenue nor DHSS were interested in pursuing him. The DHSS said that in some such circumstances they might deem as if contributions had been made, but then they didn't do so.

Some people may have had periods of low earnings, in which there may have been exemptions from being compelled to pay contributions, but they may have chosen or may choose to pay voluntary contributions. So those people will be quite interested in exactly how many years are needed to qualify for a full state pension.

On the other hand, some people don't need to repeatedly check things like that which don't apply to them.

Pedalplodder

I am one of the women born in the early 50's whose pension date (then calculated to be within 5 years) suddenly upped by a further 18 months! I had just been made redundant (cloaked as early retirement). How was I then supposed to fund a further 18 months?! To add insult to injury, they also swiped the bus pass (as if that'd save them much money)!

George Osborne is my MP so I've had direct dialogue on this - all useless and frankly unhelpful. As an MP, he is very "hands off" and uninterested in his constituency (surprise, surprise). In summary, I was told to get work (anyone want a 60+ woman without transport), that my pension eventually will be worth more (clearly wrong even with unbroken 37 years' of contributions in) and that we all have to feel the pain...

Changing the date of one's pension so close to the deadline is unacceptable. Those women who were entitled to the earlier pension date all started work when equal pay was not the norm, even those in the professions did not get equal pay till the mid 70's! So that £10,000 worth of pension swiped by the Conservative Government really does matter to us! Who knows what tricks they'll come up with in future!

DeepsBilly

I retired this year at 65. My wife, who was born in 1954, has now to wait util she is almost 67. For 38 years we planned to enjoy our retirement together. Despite having paid max NI contribution to qualify for her SP she has now been robbed of in excess £30K. this increase in SP which she will benefit from will not compensate for those lost years of joint retirement. This has caused distress and depression. When starting to pay NI we believed that we had entered into a contract with HMG to be provided with free health care and a pension at an agreed age. Any other ensurer would be guilty of a breech of contract. No cognizance has been made in regional variations in life expectancy which means that in the West of Scotland I could be dead before my wife can retire. This why we voted for Scottish independence and why I have now joined the SNP.

DeepsBilly

In addition my wife works for the local government and transfered a personal pension into her employers pension scheme to buy additional years. This pension scheme is now also changing its retirement age for full pension along with UK Gov guidlines. So she has been shafted from both directions along with millions of other baby boomers. Rememebr we are the generation of voters!

happypete

Apologies if this has been mentioned, but the statement that state pensions have increased by £950 per year is just plain wrong. He must have been talking to IDS.

jamesd

mr-tom wrote: »

The elephant in the room though is the ability to take what you want from your pension, when you want to. ... The rich had this option for a long time any way, so nothing new there. The problem is extending it to everyone else. The general opinion was that many people would just cash in their pensions as they never expected to get much in weekly payments

The people with that general view will in a few years get evidence to support their views from me. I will as rapidly as I sensibly can withdraw all money from my pension pot. Not to spend it but to reduce the legislative risk imposed by people making such arguments on my retirement planning.

For me it's not a blow it or not choice, it's a use pension or ISA or other investments choice. The current regime forces me to use much non-pension investing to achieve my retirement objectives. The new one lets me use pension investing for it. That's because I have a desire for a level income until I reach state pension age and beyond, while also providing for contingencies like the chance of needing care, while also drawing at rates that are sensible for my own life expectancy.

I'm sure that we'll see headlines about some people blowing the money. That makes nice headlines. I expect that there are pre-orders at Lamborghini dealers already from those who want to try to be first to get a brief bit of notoriety. The ones who don't blow it are much less sensational and less newsworthy.

Pincher

When you get old, you need care homes.
If you have savings, you end up paying, so surely the idea is to use it all up before you need care?


For people with lots of savings, obviously not.
For people with peanuts, it's just an obstacle for full state funding.


Assuming the care burden is not possible to bear, they need to make it clear now that the state will only pay for euthanasia and cremation when you apply for care. Otherwise it's another mass compensation claim, with people saying, "but I blew all my savings because you said you were going to pay for my care. It's all your fault."

lyndamb

Will David cameron be making sure that the people now employed in Pension offices can actually calculate the pension payments they are supposed to be paying pensioners and not just reading from a list of printed answers.
I have had to spend months arguing with them on 2 separate occasions (2011 & 2014) because my payments were miscalculated. I went to the trouble on both occasions of writing and detailing the payments that should have been made and was told on the first occasion by 7 different operators that what it said on the computer was correct. Both times with perseverance I was found to be correct and they were wrong. Did I get a written apology - NO. I said I wanted to make a formal complaint on both occasions and was never given the courtesy of this being acknowledged.

I wounder how many other people who do not have an accountancy background are being ripped off by the government who are happy to say they are helping pensioners but have no idea how their own system works.

Like everyone else I think you MSE has a duty to give all the other parties the same opportunity as they have afforded David Cameron or it makes a joke of what you set up here in the first place.

Pensions like every other Government scheme are a case of ifs and buts not definite figures

While I am on my soapbox the comment about "keeping free bus passes" I would like to comment on. I moved home a few months ago. I am registered disabled and as I am getting around on crutches with my foot in an aircast I need help to go anywhere. I asked Hampshire council could I have a form sent out to change my present free bus pass as it is for a different council area. I was very helpfully told I need to go to their offices to collect it. Maybe while David Cameron is "making things easier for pensioners" he could make an effort to make sure that simple things like 42 page forms for council tax rebates and forms for bus passes can be reduced in size and be available by post for those of us who can't get to a post office and who don't have a home office with access to photocopiers, printers etc. In case anyone is wondering no I won't be able to go on daily bus trips with my free bus pass but the fact it has a photo on it means it can be used as proof that I am a pensioner.

I could detail everything in the last 6 months that have meant have been totally stripped of my security and dignity but it would take me 6 months to write it all.

Bellshillbaker

I have had personal experience of recent retirement. I was a serving Police Officer who was injured on duty. My experience has been appalling. I have had to fight every step of the way to get the pension I was entitled to and even then I have been short changed.

Pensions all have small print attached and interpretations added to whatever legislation is made so that what it looks like is not ever what you should expect to get.

The pension "giveaway" will not be what it seems. Plans are afoot to hive off much of the lump sums people ask for (up to 25%) and tax them heavily. Due to the sums of money involved the tax will be 40%. That effectively will half your pension stake almost.

Be very wary of these reforms. They hide under the guise of giving people what they want but the reality will be that they cut huge budget deficits by raking in lots of tax.