SINGLE

Whiterose23

ronnies6 said:

Your missing the point, my point is I should have the right to leave my remaining pot to my nominated person. Having contributed as everyone else. Yes times have changed so should that rule

Totally agree with this. The scheme was set up at a time when the spouse (usually the wife) depended on the husband's pension payment, but times have moved on. Either they should scrap the spouse benefit, or allow the holder of the pension to nominate another close relative. The holder of the pension has paid into it with part of his/her wages, as he/she might have if if was a DC pension, so in the event of their death it should be paid to a nominated beneficiary. The only way to do this is to take the CETV, which is nigh-on impossible without paying a huge fee, if at all.

Triumph13

The scheme operates on the basis that x% of people will have dependents and y% of those will outlive the member by Z years.  If you allow everyone to nominate someone then those first two numbers become 100% and the last one probably goes up to.  You then have to either increase contributions or decrease benefits across the board to pay for it.
What would be more sensible to argue for is that dependents benefits should only come at the cost of a decrease in the pension of the individual concerned - so pensions for single people go up and those for people with dependents go down.  You could argue that is fairer in terms of getting out what you paid in, but as discrimination goes it doesn't seem too unreasonable to favour people who have dependents.

ronnies6

Yes ai did read the booklet and th8s was not stated if you were single it does not pass on as it would if married. I understand there has to be rules but they wouldnot have a rule based on gender or religion . The reason why I think its discrimitive because I am single.Im paying the same in but should I die the same is not paid back, yet my contribution is not less because im single.

ronnies6

Maybe the ones at the top should decrease their bonuses☺

Andrew31

Im not sure why you really care you will be dead.    have you actually got someone in mind you want to leave it to or are jsut miffed at cross subsidising the married folk.   If so, you need to look at all other aspects of life in the UK where you also do the same.   

Sailtheworld

The OP does have a point. His total package of benefits is lower for no other reason than he's single.
The 70 year old with the 20 year old wife is a much bigger liability than a single 70 year old. Would this be reflected in a DB pension transfer?

SonOf

ronnies6 said:

Yes ai did read the booklet and th8s was not stated if you were single it does not pass on as it would if married. I understand there has to be rules but they wouldnot have a rule based on gender or religion . The reason why I think its discrimitive because I am single.Im paying the same in but should I die the same is not paid back, yet my contribution is not less because im single.

If you wanted to include further death benefits then every member would pay more to cover the costs.

As has already been said, it is a package of benefits.  Not all benefits will apply to you.   Not all benefits will apply to others.

I am surprised there is no mention of death benefits in the scheme booklet as every one I have ever looked at has a section on death benefits.

MarkCarnage

There is a cross subsidy for mortality risk in any DB scheme. That's part of the contract for a valuable benefit which you entered into. Schemes allow for dependents' benefits to be paid, and some will consider cases where the person is not a spouse, civil partner etc provided that it can clearly be shown that they are financially dependent. 
Schemes were not set up to go beyond provision for the relevant employee and their dependents. Why should they be? 

SJG1

Not that I'm in it but I believe I have read on here that the Civil Service pension does give a rebate of sorts for single people? The Railway Pension certainly doesn't and as it works out at 12 times the annual pension to transfer out (CETV) I'm not doing that either.

ronnies6

Like I have said before it wasnot in the documentation but has since been confirmed re emails. If schemes are set up to allow spouses then being single should allow a nominated person. We are not talking about an insurance that you buy for a year. It can be a sum of money totalling thousands of pounds. Again my point is why should tbe ammount accumulated (known as my pension) go back in to the fund because of being single. Anyway thankyou all for all your feed back it is much appreciated👍