MSE News: Only 45% of those retiring to get full 'single-tier' state pension

JezR

It is the kind of thing that in the 'old days' might have seen a leaflet posted through everyone's door with the details - then again how many would have gone straight to the bin.

It is a shame that the concept that everyone would be sent directly their foundation amount fell by the wayside as well.

gadgetmind

Doc_N wrote: »

it certainly isn't obvious to the very large number of people who have been conned by this Tory-led government into thinking that they'll be getting the full £148.40.

There was consultation via the green paper and then masses of information in the white paper with worked examples.

Being apathetic isn't the same as being conned.

Those who will be the furthest from the full single tier will also be those who've contracted out into defined benefit pensions, who will be getting far more from these are a result.

Is it really practical to allow people to redirect significant parts of their National Insurance payments into a separate pension but for this to not affect their state pension? And remember, no-one will be losing any of what they have already accrued.

smjxm09

I have just retired and have paid 7 years more NI than is required but because my company contracted me out the government is going to short change me. Now who shall I vote for at the general election?

Doc_N

gadgetmind wrote: »

Being apathetic isn't the same as being conned.

It is when there's been a deliberate misinformation campaign pushed out by a Conservative party machine seeking votes.

I suspect it's also going to come as quite a shock when people find that they don't meet the basic qualification test of being:


a man born on or after 6 April 1951
a woman born on or after 6 April 1953

gadgetmind

Doc_N wrote: »

It is when there's been a deliberate misinformation campaign pushed out by a Conservative party machine seeking votes.

Please provide a quote and link from either the Conservatives or HMG that you feel represents deliberate misinformation.

greenglide

a man born on or after 6 April 1951
a woman born on or after 6 April 1953

So they will get a pension based on the old (existing) rules.

No great surprise for a new scheme which starts on 6/4/2016. No-one has ever said that the changes are retrospective.

colsten

smjxm09 wrote: »

I have just retired and have paid 7 years more NI than is required but because my company contracted me out the government is going to short change me. Now who shall I vote for at the general election?

How much less would you have got from your work's pension if you had not contracted out?

Why did you stay with an employer that contracted you out if you thought you would get more (works + state pension) if you were not contracted out?

How much state pension would you have got under the old scheme, and how much will you get under the new scheme?

gadgetmind

smjxm09 wrote: »

my company contracted me out the government is going to short change me

So, you joined a pension scheme and diverted some of your NI contributions away from government coffers and into a separate pension for yourself. You now want as a large a state pension as that of someone who kept paying to HMG throughout.

As it's not your NI contributions that will be paying for the enlarged state pension you feel you are entitled to, can I safely assume that you want this funded by all of those who didn't divert their NI?

In summary, you're happy to not pay at all and for others to both pay for themselves and for you.

Little wonder that conservative principles don't appeal to you.

diablo676

gadgetmind wrote: »

Please provide a quote and link from either the Conservatives or HMG that you feel represents deliberate misinformation.

I am not the person who you were replying to but an email to this forum in November, purporting to be from Mr Cameron said "The full amount of the new State Pension will be at least £148.40 a week, but how much you get depends on the National Insurance contributions you have made"

Do you seriously think that the average person (i.e. not an expert) and who has say 40 years NI contributions will not take this at face value? That person doesn't take into account that the weasel words hide some caveats which are not pointed out ?? The phrase 'depends on the National Insurance contributions' hide the bits about being contracted out - unless you are a forensic accountant who would immediately look into it further. - whereas most normal people would just assume it meant simply the number of years.

Ian Duncan Smith stated at around the same time that he would get some publicity going to show the general public what it meant for them. If he did this then it missed me somehow.

When these proposals were originally made, some years ago now, I thought it too good to be true. Then when I also heard the phrase 'fiscally neutral' I smelt a giant rat.

The company pension I am receiving is already more than I actually need, so that in two years when I am 65 the state pension (of £116 or so) will just be a bonus.

Though not everyone is in such a happy position, if they think that they will get more than they eventually will then they could be tempted to take the cash from their pension funds and blow it on luxuries.

smjxm09

How much less would you have got from your work's pension if you had not contracted out?

Nothing less, the pension stayed the same, as I was contracted out when I was still on a final salary pension. Maybe my company made some money out of this.

gadgetmind wrote: »

So, you joined a pension scheme and diverted some of your NI contributions away from government coffers and into a separate pension for yourself. You now want as a large a state pension as that of someone who kept paying to HMG throughout.

As it's not your NI contributions that will be paying for the enlarged state pension you feel you are entitled to, can I safely assume that you want this funded by all of those who didn't divert their NI?

In summary, you're happy to not pay at all and for others to both pay for themselves and for you.

Little wonder that conservative principles don't appeal to you.

I didn't do anything. I just kept paying into my company pension. As far as I remember I wasn't given a choice. If I was then the implications were not explained as the reduction in NI was only small but the cost from next year will be large. Those extra 7 years of NI contributions that I have made have given me nothing even though those 7 years more than cover the NI reduction during those contracted out years.