Mother's pension

Flugelhorn

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Pollycat

Flugelhorn said:

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Me too.

The OP's Mum was born in 1926.
My Mum was born in 1932 and only paid a reduced stamp. 
I was born in 1953 and the majority of the women I worked with opted to pay the reduced stamp.

I think the OP has had some very good responses, especially considering the vague information provided.

xylophone

All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

Have a look at the information in the link in my post of 30 September above, particularly on pages 15 and 16.

It is possible that despite the contributions made, your mother did nor fulfil the conditions set out on those pages to be eligible for full or pro rata BSP.

The full BSP in 1986 was under £40 a week.

If she did fulfil the conditions and was denied a state pension at 60, then it would appear that an error occurred.

Only DWP can clarify.

See Marcon's post 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79519903/#Comment_79519903

With regard to MWS. a lady of my acquaintance who was born in 1925 worked full time through the war years and up to 1950 - after this she worked only part time up to 1964 when her children had been at secondary school for a few years so she felt she could return full time.

It was only from 1964 - 1985 that she paid "full stamp" and so qualified for a pro rata state pension (with adjustment for Contracting Out).

Very sadly, it was only a matter of months before she was receiving full SP and a widow's pension as her (slightly younger) husband died very suddenly from an unsuspected heart condition.

Pollycat

I agree with xylophone re contacting DWP.

OP
When did you contact DWP?
What information did you provide for them to investigate? Your first post on here wasn't even clear that you were talking about the state pension.
Are you sure you wrote to the right address?

Silvertabby

Pollycat said:

Flugelhorn said:

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Me too.

The OP's Mum was born in 1926.
My Mum was born in 1932 and only paid a reduced stamp. 
I was born in 1953 and the majority of the women I worked with opted to pay the reduced stamp.

I think the OP has had some very good responses, especially considering the vague information provided.

When a friend got married in the early 1970s our already married colleagues insisted that she 'claim back her stamp, as the money was better off in her pocket than the government's'.  That was the norm at the time - and they laughed at her for her 'stupidity' at opting to keep paying the full stamp.

When I got married I received the same 'advice' from my mum - to get 'my money back, as there was no point in paying more than I had to'.

This was after 1978, so I just said that it was no longer an option.  I didn't say that, given the choice, I would have paid the full whack, because she would have seen that as 'throwing away good money'.

Britannia12345

Thanks, I'll chase the Dwp again and see if they can throw any light on it. 

Pollycat

Silvertabby said:

Pollycat said:

Flugelhorn said:

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Me too.

The OP's Mum was born in 1926.
My Mum was born in 1932 and only paid a reduced stamp. 
I was born in 1953 and the majority of the women I worked with opted to pay the reduced stamp.

I think the OP has had some very good responses, especially considering the vague information provided.

When a friend got married in the early 1970s our already married colleagues insisted that she 'claim back her stamp, as the money was better off in her pocket than the government's'.  That was the norm at the time - and they laughed at her for her 'stupidity' at opting to keep paying the full stamp.

When I got married I received the same 'advice' from my mum - to get 'my money back, as there was no point in paying more than I had to'.

This was after 1978, so I just said that it was no longer an option.  I didn't say that, given the choice, I would have paid the full whack, because she would have seen that as 'throwing away good money'.

I was lucky enough to work in the pension department of the company I worked for.
I started work in 1970.
I qualified for a marriage gratuity payment when I get married in 1974.
The money would have been very useful.
But I wanted to keep my pension entitlement.
As it turned out, I retired age 50 and 2 months with a pension bases on 39 years and 9 months.

Silvertabby

Pollycat said:

Silvertabby said:

Pollycat said:

Flugelhorn said:

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Me too.

The OP's Mum was born in 1926.
My Mum was born in 1932 and only paid a reduced stamp. 
I was born in 1953 and the majority of the women I worked with opted to pay the reduced stamp.

I think the OP has had some very good responses, especially considering the vague information provided.

When a friend got married in the early 1970s our already married colleagues insisted that she 'claim back her stamp, as the money was better off in her pocket than the government's'.  That was the norm at the time - and they laughed at her for her 'stupidity' at opting to keep paying the full stamp.

When I got married I received the same 'advice' from my mum - to get 'my money back, as there was no point in paying more than I had to'.

This was after 1978, so I just said that it was no longer an option.  I didn't say that, given the choice, I would have paid the full whack, because she would have seen that as 'throwing away good money'.

I was lucky enough to work in the pension department of the company I worked for.
I started work in 1970.
I qualified for a marriage gratuity payment when I get married in 1974.
The money would have been very useful.
But I wanted to keep my pension entitlement.
As it turned out, I retired age 50 and 2 months with a pension bases on 39 years and 9 months.

My first pension was a Leyland Motors DB in the 1970s.  As I left (to join the WRAF) with just a few months service/was under age 25, my only option was an automatic refund of my contributions.

These DB pension benefits, with 48 years of cost of living increases, would have been way more valuable than the £80 refund I received - but that was a lot of money back then, and came in very useful when I went shopping for all the new things I needed (ok, wanted) for my new life.  

I more than made up for it with my 42 years of public sector DB pensions.  

DBdoobydoo

Silvertabby said:

Pollycat said:

Silvertabby said:

Pollycat said:

Flugelhorn said:

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Me too.

The OP's Mum was born in 1926.
My Mum was born in 1932 and only paid a reduced stamp. 
I was born in 1953 and the majority of the women I worked with opted to pay the reduced stamp.

I think the OP has had some very good responses, especially considering the vague information provided.

When a friend got married in the early 1970s our already married colleagues insisted that she 'claim back her stamp, as the money was better off in her pocket than the government's'.  That was the norm at the time - and they laughed at her for her 'stupidity' at opting to keep paying the full stamp.

When I got married I received the same 'advice' from my mum - to get 'my money back, as there was no point in paying more than I had to'.

This was after 1978, so I just said that it was no longer an option.  I didn't say that, given the choice, I would have paid the full whack, because she would have seen that as 'throwing away good money'.

I was lucky enough to work in the pension department of the company I worked for.
I started work in 1970.
I qualified for a marriage gratuity payment when I get married in 1974.
The money would have been very useful.
But I wanted to keep my pension entitlement.
As it turned out, I retired age 50 and 2 months with a pension bases on 39 years and 9 months.

My first pension was a Leyland Motors DB in the 1970s.  As I left (to join the WRAF) with just a few months service/was under age 25, my only option was an automatic refund of my contributions.

These DB pension benefits, with 48 years of cost of living increases, would have been way more valuable than the £80 refund I received - but that was a lot of money back then, and came in very useful when I went shopping for all the new things I needed (ok, wanted) for my new life.  

I more than made up for it with my 42 years of public sector DB pensions.  

I worked for the NHS from 1978-1982. When I left I got my pension contributions returned as I had contributed for less than five years. I enjoyed the £800 windfall but now would have appreciated the pension with nearly 40 years of cost of living increases much more. The rules were changed a few years later& nowadays contributions are only returned if you contribute for less than two years.

p00hsticks

DBdoobydoo said:

Silvertabby said:

Pollycat said:

Silvertabby said:

Pollycat said:

Flugelhorn said:

Britannia12345 said:

Because I have no idea and she can't remember anything about a married women's stamp. All she can remember is she knows she paid full ni all her working life. 

I honestly suspect she didn't - it was pretty standard for married women to pay the "married women's stamp" and rely on their husband's contributions instead - "why pay twice?" they used to say and preferred to have the money at the time.

Me too.

The OP's Mum was born in 1926.
My Mum was born in 1932 and only paid a reduced stamp. 
I was born in 1953 and the majority of the women I worked with opted to pay the reduced stamp.

I think the OP has had some very good responses, especially considering the vague information provided.

When a friend got married in the early 1970s our already married colleagues insisted that she 'claim back her stamp, as the money was better off in her pocket than the government's'.  That was the norm at the time - and they laughed at her for her 'stupidity' at opting to keep paying the full stamp.

When I got married I received the same 'advice' from my mum - to get 'my money back, as there was no point in paying more than I had to'.

This was after 1978, so I just said that it was no longer an option.  I didn't say that, given the choice, I would have paid the full whack, because she would have seen that as 'throwing away good money'.

I was lucky enough to work in the pension department of the company I worked for.
I started work in 1970.
I qualified for a marriage gratuity payment when I get married in 1974.
The money would have been very useful.
But I wanted to keep my pension entitlement.
As it turned out, I retired age 50 and 2 months with a pension bases on 39 years and 9 months.

My first pension was a Leyland Motors DB in the 1970s.  As I left (to join the WRAF) with just a few months service/was under age 25, my only option was an automatic refund of my contributions.

These DB pension benefits, with 48 years of cost of living increases, would have been way more valuable than the £80 refund I received - but that was a lot of money back then, and came in very useful when I went shopping for all the new things I needed (ok, wanted) for my new life.  

I more than made up for it with my 42 years of public sector DB pensions.  

The rules were changed a few years later& nowadays contributions are only returned if you contribute for less than two years.

I'm not sure if its the same in the NHS, but many organisations (including the Civil Service) will, rather than just returning your contributions,  also give you the option of transferring what you have built up, including the nominal emplyer contributions and associated tax relief,  into a pension scheme of your own. I left one job just shy of two years and by setting up my own SIPP I got far more than what I would have been refunded.