National Insurance not paid by former husband

Derek53

Hi everyone, a question about National Insurance here

My wife receives a state pension. Because I also receive a state pension and a workplace pension, she is not eligible for pension credit and just receives the basic pension. She has very few qualifying years because her former husband, who ran pubs and restaurants, made her work in them for over 30 years, controlled her hours, paid her when he felt like it and did not pay tax or National Insurance on her behalf. She did not dare object or contact the authorities as the former husband was a violent and controlling man who terrorized her into doing exactly what he wanted and threatened to kill her on more than one occasion. This was in the days when the police didn't take domestic violence seriously and would have sent her back home after complaining, to be beaten up again or worse.

She therefore, through no fault of her own, has a huge gap in her National Insurance record despite being effectively an employee of her former husband. I have a vague recollection that where it can be demonstrated that someone was employed but tax and NI were not paid, NI contributions can be deemed for those years and added to that person's NI record. Does anyone know if this is actually the case?

Thanks, Derek.

xylophone

just receives the basic pension.

What exactly do you mean by this?

Derek53

xylophone wrote: »

What exactly do you mean by this?

I mean that she receives a basic pension that is substantially less than if she had 40 qualifying years and receives no pension credit to top it up.

MovingForwards

You mean £129.20 PW?

atush

Or it is prorated ie more then 10 years but less than full contributions?

This really should have been taken care of during the divorce when presumably she was no longer in the same home? Contact the solicitor she used and get them to sort it out?

Derek53

Maureen is not here at the moment so I can't ask her what she's getting but I think it's about £50-something. I have not told her I'm doing this thread because I don't want to get her hopes up if the answer to the original question is going to be No. Likewise I have not contacted the DWP with this question because I do not want to open up a whole can of worms if there is going to be no benefit to her.

We did not use a divorce solicitor, she divorced him herself after living apart for more than 5 years. We have only recently got married.

xylophone

Did both your wife and her ex husband reach SPA before 6/4/2016 but after 6/4/2010?

Was she still married to him when she reached SPA and when he reached SPA?

Did she divorce him after reaching her SPA?

stoozie1

It may be worth deleting wife's name.

elsien

stoozie1 wrote: »

It may be worth deleting wife's name.

Yep, I was about to suggest the same. Particularly if your user name is also your real name. And you haven't told your wife you are posting potentially identifiable information about her.

Derek53

xylophone wrote: »

A. Did both your wife and her ex husband reach SPA before 6/4/2016 but after 6/4/2010?

B. Was she still married to him when she reached SPA and when he reached SPA?

C. Did she divorce him after reaching her SPA?

A. She reached SPA before 2010, he reached it between those two dates.

B. Yes.

C. Yes. Divorced and remarried this year.

stoozie1 wrote: »

It may be worth deleting wife's name.

Thanks but no need, I use these names because they mean something to us but we are not identifiable by them.

Edited To Add: I can see why this line of inquiry looks promising and I'm grateful to respondents for bringing it up. Obviously I'm very happy to pursue it, but would also like to know the answer to the original question if anyone can help with that.

xylophone

Both reached SPA under the old scheme.

See Section 11

See https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs19_state_pension_fcs.pdf

Does this make any difference in respect of what she is currently receiving?

With regard to the NI tax not paid, if there are no records of when she worked and what she received, it would seem difficult to prove a case?