Example of things not to do regarding retirement

GibbsRule_No3

xylophone wrote: »

Enabled by having drawn a couple of (presumably index linked) DB pensions....

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5904563/example-of-things-not-to-do-regarding-retirement



will also have another small private pension and (presumably) are benefiting from being able to make good any COPE deduction from the state pension?

Not too dusty really?:)

Which is why I said I would be able to have a “comfortable” retirement, when I got there.

Audaxer

I felt sorry for her until I read about her downsizing from a £600k house. This is not a real hardship story as she has plenty to tide her over.

Terron

kidmugsy wrote: »

"Women of my age ... workplace pensions were not routinely offered as they are now." I dare say that different people experienced different things, but my wife was always offered workplace pensions. And with earlier scheme retirement ages than her male colleagues.

That is a little unfair to her. The bit about workplace pensions is in a separate sentence that does not mention women. It is also correct. I am a few years younger and a man but was not offered a workplace pension in my first job. There was one but it was only for managers (men and women).


Still to not have known that the pension age change was coming she must have only been consulting poor sources of news - the Guardian? And her current investments are poor.

TheShape

I live alone and, at 63, had expected to be drawing a state pension by now. As it is, I have to wait another three years, and am getting by on the minimum wage earned from my part-time job as a charity administration assistant. Last year that amounted to £2,500.

She's not having to work too hard to get by. At minimum wage £2500 per year means she's working no more than 7 hours per week.

badmemory

I didn't get a workplace pension until I was 47. Bearing in mind I worked for a university for my first 13 yrs (so don't believe all you read). But I did know that retiring at 60 was possible for me as also did my younger sister, as she missed a change by a whole 10 days. It was generally talked about at the time even in my hairdressers, not a place where the conversation is exactly intellectual. So I think a lot of these WASPI women did hear but didn't want to listen & just thought it would all go away.


If we want equality, & I certainly did, & not to be dependant on some male (whether father, husband or son) then we have to face what that entails. Although we are still a long way from equal ability to earn (notice I don't say equal pay) & we will only likely get that if our wombs can give birth without us being present.


What we should all be shouting about is the late changes to SPA for both sexes.


The Guardian (Manchester Guardian) was a different paper then & actually printed the news as it was regardless, it was only comments/editorials that sometimes had political bias which of course you could never accuse any other paper of having - COULD YOU? REALLY!

bostonerimus

GibbsRule_No3 wrote: »

I’d like to hear from men born on my birthday who now have to wait until 66 and how they feel.

I have to wait until 67 under the current rules. I've made plans to account for any slip in that date or reduction in amount. I actually did well out of the flat rate pension changes as I would have only qualified for basic state pension and the 30% increase in my SP more than makes up for having top wait a bit longer.

GibbsRule_No3

bostonerimus wrote: »

I have to wait until 67 under the current rules. I've made plans to account for any slip in that date or reduction in amount. I actually did well out of the flat rate pension changes as I would have only qualified for basic state pension and the 30% increase in my SP more than makes up for having top wait a bit longer.

So you retire between 2026-2028?

Malthusian

Comments disabled. Even the Grauniad didn't think this story stood up.

AnotherJoe

GibbsRule_No3 wrote: »

After the first rise in SP age, I should have been receiving my SP this month, but now won’t get it until March 2020. I did not mind the first rise, it is the extra months that have been now added that bug me. I’d like to hear from men born on my birthday who now have to wait until 66 and how they feel. I have dropped to three days a week but the SP will pay my rent, did not earn enough as a single female, paying rent, to be able to buy a Property, hence the rent until I die. When I do get there I will, agreed, have a “comfortable” continuing lifestyle. BTW with my three day week and a colleague on maternity leave for a year, and only 16 hour a week over three days replacement for the maternity cover, the rest of our workmates are suffering and having to cover for us, when I go they will replace with a full time person. So it is not just me feeling fed up.

Sh*t happens, it could have been much worse, plan for it and deal with it.


(thats how I feel, in the same boat as you regards age, you did ask)

Silvertabby

badmemory wrote: »

I didn't get a workplace pension until I was 47. Bearing in mind I worked for a university for my first 13 yrs (so don't believe all you read). But I did know that retiring at 60 was possible for me as also did my younger sister, as she missed a change by a whole 10 days. It was generally talked about at the time even in my hairdressers, not a place where the conversation is exactly intellectual. So I think a lot of these WASPI women did hear but didn't want to listen & just thought it would all go away.

Exactly. WASPI women would have been in their late 30s/early 40s at the time the changes were announced, and my theory is that they thought: 'pensions are only for pensioners - nothing to do with me' - and immediately 'forgot' about it all.