state pension amounts

greenglide

Yes they would be separate. Presumably though the use the same live data or do they replicate?

The pensions system gets a snapshot of NIRS2 data from HMRC at SPa and uses that forever more to make payments - the contributions data don't change unless the final relevant year data is not available yet or a spouse should die.

Chickereeeee

bigfreddiel wrote: »

It was within a few pence of my paper forecast

Cheers fj

Did you have any contracted-out period?

C

Chickereeeee

Chickereeeee wrote: »

Reply from HMRC today:

We will let you know when this has been rectified so that you can log back in and see correct values."

I will post when/if they 'let me know'....

C

jem16

Chickereeeee wrote: »

Did you have any contracted-out period?

C

Mine was correct and agreed with my paper statement of Feb 2015. I was contracted out for all my working life - previous paper statement said I would get £76 under new rules but £115 under current rules.

It seems to be a bit of a hit and miss to be honest.

saver861

greenglide wrote: »

The pensions system gets a snapshot of NIRS2 data from HMRC at SPa and uses that forever more to make payments - the contributions data don't change unless the final relevant year data is not available yet or a spouse should die.

Ok that would make sense.

However, that is when the pensions are in payment? I mean, until someone reaches spa, their data is on the NI system? At retirement that data is cloned to the payments system? But this beta estimate system must be getting its data from the live contributions system since all those getting estimates have not yet reached spa?

Or, am I mis-reading your post?

greenglide

The live data in NPS, held by HMRC, will not suddenly gone wrong. The Beta service will be interpreting some of it wrongly. The figure it gave me for the starting amount agreed with the paper forecast at around £160 but it then went on to say that if I worked until SPa (in May 2016!!!) it would have grown to £130 or so.

This is clearly rubbish but would be reasonable for a new rules calculation and the Rebate Derived Amount (or whatever it is called now). Alternatively it may not be able to handle the special case of trying to calculate forward for someone with SPa in 2016 / 2017 when there is nothing to calculate.

They obviously havent designed (it doesnt actually state clearly what the figures are) or tested it properly.

Hopefully HMRC (actually their contractors) put some serious into the NPS (NIRS2 upgrade). It seems to work. People are getting awards of nSP now and we see no huge swelling of discontent (yes).

saver861

greenglide wrote: »

The live data in NPS, held by HMRC, will not suddenly gone wrong. The Beta service will be interpreting some of it wrongly. The figure it gave me for the starting amount agreed with the paper forecast at around £160 but it then went on to say that if I worked until SPa (in May 2016!!!) it would have grown to £130 or so.

No I was not thinking the live data on the main system is incorrect. Heaven forbid, then we would have the mother of all messes!!

The trouble is there does not seem to be consistency it what it is getting incorrect. If all starting amounts were correct then you could narrow it down to the spa forecasting. However, that does not seem to be the case as some are getting correct amounts and some are getting both starting amount incorrect and the spa amount incorrect.

The integrity of the data its getting is correct so its not the source data causing the issue. Equally its not one particular functionality process on the data that's causing problems it would appear.

I'm a bit surprised they still allowing access if its spewing out such incorrect results. I'm not even sure how they could tell that it is just 'a small number' being impacted.

bigfreddiel

Chickereeeee wrote: »

Did you have any contracted-out period?

C

Yes 14 years

fj

chris_m

saver861 wrote: »

I'm a bit surprised they still allowing access if its spewing out such incorrect results. I'm not even sure how they could tell that it is just 'a small number' being impacted.

With a "beta" version, surely the more use it gets, the better.

saver861

chris_m wrote: »

With a "beta" version, surely the more use it gets, the better.

Well that would be generally true, however, if it is spewing out incorrect information there is a limit how long they can leave it it is current state.