LGPS - what option should I take - advice please

greenglide

Thanks for confirming my assertion that many LGPS members had a pensionable age of 60!

The scheme pension scheme was 65 when I was there, I got my pension at 60 because of the "rule of 85" or whatever. If I hadnt met that because I had one less year of service I would have had to wait until 65 having not met the "rule of 85".

Given you wouldn't have received an actuarial increase until over 65, why defer...?

I had assumed (wrongly) that deferring the pension would have got me increments on the pension when it got paid but it wasnt an option at all - it was you get it now, if you dont you will lose the money.

The rules changed not long after I left but I suspect that would simply have pushed my scheme age to 65 so I would have lost the benefit from the "rule of 65". I am quite happy accept the money - at the time I hadnt expected it to pay out at 60 anyway since I always knew the scheme age was 65 under normal circumstances. As a deferred member it is particularly kind of them!

hyubh

Nick_C wrote: »

Thanks for confirming my assertion that many LGPS members had a pensionable age of 60!

Erm, no one was denying the 85 year rule existed (exists)...

onesixfive

As everyone replying on this forum appears well-versed on the LGPS, I wonder can you guys help please?


I thought I retired at 66 - I now discover I will be 67 & that The Pensions Act 2014 brought the increase in the State Pension age from 66 to 67 forward by eight years!

PLUS as an ex-local government employee, unlike most 55 year-olds (who can are now being encouraged to surrender private pensions), I am unable to take the LGPS which I've contributed to for almost 30 years until I am 60, just because the local council cant afford the £40k+ needed to release my funds early!

As I deferred prior to April 2014, the rules for that scheme are that deferred pensions cannot be accessed until age 60. An employer may release earlier than that if you are suffering Ill Health or for compassionate reasons.

I therefore requested early payment of deferred benefits on compassionate grounds


(my 82 year old mum is requiring more care & I've already cut my working hours). Despite this reduction in my working week, I am still taking lots of additional days/hours off work to take her to appointments, and care for her increasing needs.
As an only child (with no children of my own), this care all falls on my shoulders.
My husband retires next year at 65, (he will receive only State Pension, and a small contribution via the Pension Protection Fund - due to the mismanagement of his pension by his ex-employer)
Plus he requires a hip replacement imminently, so he will be unable to assist in mum's increasing care - and depending upon the success of the operation, he will temporarily require personal help himself.
Due to my long-term epilepsy, I am not allowed to drive, so it will put a huge strain on my time & finances if I have to bus/taxi to mum's instead of my husband driving me.
I appreciate in the short term that this request will have an immediate cost implication for one department of the Council. However, with mum's care in our hands, it should cut the cost of care required in the long term, needed to be provided by another department of the same Council.

Any ideas/suggestions please to help boost my appeal ?

hyubh

sng165 wrote: »

Any ideas/suggestions please to help boost my appeal?

1. Drop the silly talk of 'mismanagement', when the situation as described is clearly the opposite. Similarly, what has happened to your state pension age is completely irrelevant to your LGPS benefits.

2. Focus on the actual reasons you have nevertheless identified (mum needing care, husband about to have an operation, own long-term epilepsy). You do not need any more.

3. Make reference to your ex-employer's LGPS discretionary policy, and in particular, what that document says about its discretion under regulation 30(5) of the 2008 scheme. Ask HR for a copy if you don't already have one. If the policy statement is something like, 'will not ordinarily agree, but may do so in exceptional circumstances', phrase your situation as 'exceptional', or whatever term the document uses.

onesixfive

hyubh wrote: »

1. Drop the silly talk of 'mismanagement', when the situation as described is clearly the opposite. Similarly, what has happened to your state pension age is completely irrelevant to your LGPS benefits.


2. Focus on the actual reasons you have nevertheless identified (mum needing care, husband about to have an operation, own long-term epilepsy). You do not need any more.

3. Make reference to your ex-employer's LGPS discretionary policy, and in particular, what that document says about its discretion under regulation 30(5) of the 2008 scheme. Ask HR for a copy if you don't already have one. If the policy statement is something like, 'will not ordinarily agree, but may do so in exceptional circumstances', phrase your situation as 'exceptional', or whatever term the document uses.

Thanks for that.
I have now got a copy of the policy, and will quote from it.


I thought all monies were funded at County level rather than Local council level? I understand that the Local council wont reflect a wage-saving as I no longer work there, but early funding of pension should surely be funded at County level??


(PS - it was my husband's pension that ended up with the Pension Protection Fund that led to my perhaps "silly" comments on mismanagement! - sorry)

AlanP_2

LGPS schemes are typically administered at county level with all the authorities and other eligible bodies within the county participating. Makes sense and saves admin costs.

However each member body is responsible for funding it's pensioners so the cost for your early access will be paid for by your ex-employer.

hyubh

sng165 wrote: »

I thought all monies were funded at County level rather than Local council level? I understand that the Local council wont reflect a wage-saving as I no longer work there, but early funding of pension should surely be funded at County level??

Seriously, concentrate on relevant issues only. That said... in general (there are a few exceptions) the LGPS is indeed organised at the county level, or more exactly, what was the county level when local government was reorganised in the mid-70s. As such, each county council (or a nominated successor body, e.g. Tameside BC for the former Greater Manchester CC) is the 'administering authority' for an LGPS pension fund, and plays an equivalent role to the trustees in a private sector scheme.

Admittedly, unlike a private sector scheme's trustees, an LGPS administering authority will itself be an employer (and probably a significant one) in its own pension fund. As such, it will be a significant funder of the scheme. However, in principle it will only be funding the liabilities attributable to its own employees (past and present), not the employees of other employers in the fund. As such, even once someone leaves, their liabilities don't go into one big 'pot' - they are still tracked at the employer level.

(PS - it was my husband's pension that ended up with the Pension Protection Fund that led to my perhaps "silly" comments on mismanagement! - sorry)

No problem.