MSE News: Women's state pension petition gathers over 50,000 signatures

Pollycat

saver861 wrote: »

I think you may have misinterpreted my comment. I merely state that I think the discussion on WASPI has exhausted itself. It's difficult to see any new that to be added at this stage.

I was not suggesting the thread be closed or the discussion should stop - indeed, I have no control over that. The MSE mod would make that decision if a thread should be closed and I don't see any reason why this thread should be closed.

I don't think I have misinterpreted your comment at all.

The discussion on WASPI should continue as long as posters wish to debate it.

saver861

RickyB2000 wrote: »

Though agree, someone at bang on 30 with 10 years to go is in a better position than someone on 40 but at SPA as the one on 30 can top up to full pension. But again, the 40 year is no worse off than before, just unable to take advantage of the ability to top up (but looked at from a pure fairness point of view, this is unfair).

You are referring to the new pension system and as such, there is no unfairness to anyone going from the old system to the new one. Whatever someone would have got on the old system will get on the new system regardless of the contracting out business etc.

The problem was that many thought they were going to get £155 per week because they had 35 years, me included. When more information came out about contracting out etc then it became clear that was not the case and those people will only get the £119 they would have got in any case.

saver861

hyubh wrote: »

Says someone early-retired on a final salary pension! Fancy a swap? I'll give you my 'awareness' than my 5% employer DC pension is rubbish and that the state pension may well be means tested by the time I'm of the age, and you'll give me (say) 50% of your LGPS pension every month.

Fully agree that all those on DB public sector pensions had the best pension going. Many people on this forum have benefited from DB final salary pension. No question about that, so I don't think those following will have the same good fortune. You might say though that public sector pay lagged behind private sector for many years so not necessarily everything was of great benefit in public sector.

So, its not to say the young people will have something better, but they will have the opportunity, education and awareness to make the best of their position.

saver861

Pollycat wrote: »

I don't think I have misinterpreted your comment at all.

The discussion on WASPI should continue as long as posters wish to debate it.

Of course, absolutely.

I'm not sure how you interpreted my comment to be anything different but I've tried to explain that I was not suggesting anything different.

RickyB2000

saver861 wrote: »

You are referring to the new pension system and as such, there is no unfairness to anyone going from the old system to the new one. Whatever someone would have got on the old system will get on the new system regardless of the contracting out business etc.

The problem was that many thought they were going to get £155 per week because they had 35 years, me included. When more information came out about contracting out etc then it became clear that was not the case and those people will only get the £119 they would have got in any case.

There is unfairness though. Someone with say 35 contracted out years and 10 more working years will get their contracted out private pension pot PLUS a full state pension of £155. Someone with 35 contracted in years and 10 more working years can get £155 but no contracted out element of a private pension. Someone with 45 contracted out years but no more working years will get their contracted out element of the private pension plus a state pension of ~£120 and can buy another £4. So no one loses out relative to their position in the old scheme, but certain people have a lot to gain (interestingly MPs as their schemes are contracted out and many will have years to retirement).

People thought, which means it was either poorly communicated or poorly understood. I am a long way from retirement so this was on the periphery, how long did it take between hearing £155 and then finding out it wasn't £155? Did it have a big impact on retirement planning?

RickyB2000

saver861 wrote: »

Fully agree that all those on DB public sector pensions had the best pension going. Many people on this forum have benefited from DB final salary pension. No question about that, so I don't think those following will have the same good fortune. You might say though that public sector pay lagged behind private sector for many years so not necessarily everything was of great benefit in public sector.

So, its not to say the young people will have something better, but they will have the opportunity, education and awareness to make the best of their position.

I would certainly say young people WONT have something better. They will have something much worse. Pretty much across the board (pensions, taxes, student loans, retirement dates etc). The last thing I would want to see is them delay this SP age change and increase the burden on young people somewhere to make up the shortfall.

Goldiegirl

RickyB2000 wrote: »

There is unfairness though. Someone with say 35 contracted out years and 10 more working years will get their contracted out private pension pot PLUS a full state pension of £155. Someone with 35 contracted in years and 10 more working years can get £155 but no contracted out element of a private pension. Someone with 45 contracted out years but no more working years will get their contracted out element of the private pension plus a state pension of ~£120 and can buy another £4. So no one loses out, but certain people have a lot to gain.

People thought, which means it was either poorly communicated or poorly understood. I am a long way from retirement so this was on the periphery, how long did it take between hearing £155 and then finding out it wasn't £155? Did it have a big impact on retirement planning?

I can't remember how long it took from the announcement of the new state pension, until I realised that I wouldn't actually get the full £155.

But it wasn't that long before realisation dawned. But I do keep eye on financial news reports, so I probably realised it before many people did.

But it made no real impact on my retirement planning at that time.

I've got 39 years of contributions, but I was contracted out for many of those years. My current state pension forecast is about £126pw.

So, I'm getting what I paid for, which is what I was originally expecting.

I've retired early anyway, but I intend making voluntary NI contributions, and I have got enough time to make up to the full £155, so I am one of the lucky ones in this respect.

I suppose it's had a belated impact on my retirement planning, in that I can improve my situation, over and above what I was originally expecting.

saver861

RickyB2000 wrote: »

People thought, which means it was either poorly communicated or poorly understood. I am a long way from retirement so this was on the periphery, how long did it take between hearing £155 and then finding out it wasn't £155? Did it have a big impact on retirement planning?

Poorly communicated in the main. There are several threads on here about people being confused by their statements, starting amounts etc etc. They have redesigned the statements to make them clearer but there are many still unclear about what they are getting.

There is a lot of criticism of the government in the way they put the news out and the fact that so many thought they were going to get the £155.

I don't know when the £155 was first touted, but its only in the autumn statement that it was clarified. It was a lot of guesswork prior to that but even then the discussions around this figure only started around 2014, so it would not have impacted on retirement planning. As nobody is getting less than they would have got anyhow, there was no shortfall to make up.

greenglide

I don't know when the £155 was first touted, but its only in the autumn statement that it was clarified. It was a lot of guesswork prior to that but even then the discussions around this figure only started around 2014, so it would not have impacted on retirement planning.

Various estimates for the rate at which nSP would start were talked about over the years. They could not know what the actual figure would be as inflation over the period and uncertainties with a general election crept in as well.

What was always known was that the amount would be greater than the pension credit guarantee amount, it clearly was never going to be much more than that and was always going to be in the autumn statement as that is always when the pension rates are announced for the following April.

Pollycat

saver861 wrote: »

Of course, absolutely.

I'm not sure how you interpreted my comment to be anything different but I've tried to explain that I was not suggesting anything different.

Because you keep saying that the discussion on WASPI has exhausted itself:

saver861 wrote: »

I think you may have misinterpreted my comment. I merely state that I think the discussion on WASPI has exhausted itself. It's difficult to see any new that to be added at this stage.

I was not suggesting the thread be closed or the discussion should stop - indeed, I have no control over that. The MSE mod would make that decision if a thread should be closed and I don't see any reason why this thread should be closed.

Personally, I want to keep reading about what WASPI are saying on Facebook and I want to read other posters' opinions on what they are saying.