State pension age increase to 68 brought forward 7 years to 2037

Laycity

tempus_fugit wrote: »

Many of them are already only able to be taken at 60. My OH's LGPS pension says she can't get it before she is 60 (despite qualifying for full payout at age 62), except in exceptional circumstances. Basically unless she was at death's door she won't get it before age 60.

You can take lgps at 55 now?

chiefie

Laycity wrote: »

You can take lgps at 55 now?

Only if you were still an active member after April 2014

Pennylane

_AB wrote: »

Totally agree! How can a person plan for their retirement when the Government keep "moving the goal posts". The state pension age was first 65, then 67 and now 68...it's very sad reflection on Government failures. Where will it end...will I every get my state pension or are we all just paying in to get nothing back?


Can I encourage everyone under the 47 years old (not just those who in the ages ranges highlighted yesterday) to start pestering the Prime Minister, David Gauke (Sec of State for Work and Pensions) and their own MP's.


Martin Lewis, we need your support on this!!!!!!!!!!

Have you heard of the WASPI women? We know all about moving goalposts. We were told we could get state pension at 60, then with barely any notice we weren't told it was 63 and now we're getting to 65 and still don't get it.

tempus_fugit

Laycity wrote: »

You can take lgps at 55 now?

Not according to my OH's statements. She was a member from 1998 until 2016 and it says that you can only take it before age 60 if your employer agrees, and the word from them was there's basically no chance. Not that she needs it before age 60, but it's there in the statements.

zagfles

Pennylane wrote: »

Have you heard of the WASPI women? We know all about moving goalposts. We were told we could get state pension at 60, then with barely any notice we weren't told it was 63 and now we're getting to 65 and still don't get it.

The increase from age 60 was announced in 1993.

zagfles

tempus_fugit wrote: »

Not according to my OH's statements. She was a member from 1998 until 2016 and it says that you can only take it before age 60 if your employer agrees, and the word from them was there's basically no chance. Not that she needs it before age 60, but it's there in the statements.

DB schemes can have their own rules, they'll usually have a normal pension age of 60 or 65 and they don't have to allow early access.

zagfles

_AB wrote: »

This is a good point! Under Pensions Freedom we were supposed to be able to access our private pension pots at 55. Has this been taken away from us as well? Clarification needed on this but it wouldn't surprise me if it gets pushed back. Time to ask David Gauke (Sec of State for Work and Pensions) as it seems this is all his brilliant idea.

They've talked about making it 10 years before state pension age and current plans are to move it to 57 in around 2028 IIRC.

tempus_fugit

chiefie wrote: »

Only if you were still an active member after April 2014

Right enough, I've checked again and it does say that the "leaving date" can be 55 or over if you left employment on or after April 1, 2014. I myst have dreamt the bit about not getting the pension before age 60, either that or her employers were being a bit pernickity about it when she enquired about it.

tempus_fugit

zagfles wrote: »

DB schemes can have their own rules, they'll usually have a normal pension age of 60 or 65 and they don't have to allow early access.

Yeah, I think that's it.

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

Problem is the original plan was that people should spend one third of their adult life in retirement (on average).

Using the rate of increase in life expectancy taking place up to 2012 this gave a retirement age of 68 starting in 2037.

However 2014 and even more 2016 life expectancy predictions show that 2037 is now premature and that those retiring at 68 will now actually have fewer years in retirement on average than those retiring now. But the govt are failing to follow the advise in the report they claim to be implementing and are instead pushing ahead in a way that means that those currently retiring get a 'bigger slice of the pie' than those who will retire after 2037. for a govt who were badly hurt in the GE because they ignored inter generational fairness it seems an odd decision to reduce it.

Sad thing is that the media, MPs and most of the population can't understand the maths so this will go through unchallenged.

I fully agree with you. I suspect they are counting on the fact most of those affected will either not notice it or not think it significant (at 40 the difference between 67 and 68 is hardly important).