Transferring USS into LGPS - Gov. delay has cost me c. £2,000, help? Need help by 7th Nov!

hazel_davey

Thank you everyone, for your time and expertise.

I already have a good 15 yeas in my LGPS pension, so bumping it up to 2+ years is not an issue in my case (thankfully!).

Clearly, I need to progress the transfer to get a quote from LGPS. Thank you - my head has been hurting transferring 3 pots!

I take it there's nothing I can do about the USS pot value drop...?

hyubh

Universidad said:

hyubh said:

Universidad said:

Yes, OK. If your USS pension had vested properly - i.e. you had the requisite service period to not be a "short term member" - then staying with USS would probably offer the best overall return in my opinion. 

That's irrelevant, given the time for comparing accrual rates has been and gone when one pension is already deferred.

Relative merits of fully vested vs short term USS benefits is not irrelevant, it's an explanation of why the questions we all posed were pertinent. I'm not implying the actual service period can now be changed in deferment - just noting that the response given is germane to the discussion.

It's not germane because they've already left... It really doesn't matter if the LGPS benefit structure is brilliant and the USS not so (or vice versa), all that matters for assessing the value of a transfer is whether the transfer credit purchased (so one defined benefit) is superior to the deferred benefit being given up (a second defined benefit). It's not even like 'back in the day' when a transfer in bought a reckonable service credit... 

No, but consider the inverse - being a club transfer would mean that you should recieve equivalent value, whereas a non-club transfer does not mean that.

Again, irrelevant, since it won't be a Club transfer whatever views one might have... The OP doesn't have a choice of transferring now (non Club) or 15 years ago (Club), the only 'option' is a non-Club transfer. Put another way, getting upset about the fact the USS pulled out of the Club many moons ago (or even worse: spending time coming that conclusion) is just pointless

Universidad

hyubh said:

Universidad said:

hyubh said:

Universidad said:

Yes, OK. If your USS pension had vested properly - i.e. you had the requisite service period to not be a "short term member" - then staying with USS would probably offer the best overall return in my opinion. 

That's irrelevant, given the time for comparing accrual rates has been and gone when one pension is already deferred.

Relative merits of fully vested vs short term USS benefits is not irrelevant, it's an explanation of why the questions we all posed were pertinent. I'm not implying the actual service period can now be changed in deferment - just noting that the response given is germane to the discussion.

It's not germane because they've already left... It really doesn't matter if the LGPS benefit structure is brilliant and the USS not so (or vice versa), all that matters for assessing the value of a transfer is whether the transfer credit purchased (so one defined benefit) is superior to the deferred benefit being given up (a second defined benefit). It's not even like 'back in the day' when a transfer in bought a reckonable service credit... 

No, but consider the inverse - being a club transfer would mean that you should recieve equivalent value, whereas a non-club transfer does not mean that.

Again, irrelevant, since it won't be a Club transfer whatever views one might have... The OP doesn't have a choice of transferring now (non Club) or 15 years ago (Club), the only 'option' is a non-Club transfer. Put another way, getting upset about the fact the USS pulled out of the Club many moons ago (or even worse: spending time coming that conclusion) is just pointless

I feel like one of us is completely failing to understand the other person's perspective, but since I'm not entirely sure that's not on me I will let it rest.

hazel_davey said:

I take it there's nothing I can do about the USS pot value drop...?

No, it's really unlikely you will get anywhere by complaining that the delay has cost you, this is a really common thing to happen since the guarantees last three months and transfer processes can take multiple times that length of time.

I have had the experience of a pension I was trying to transfer drop in value twice due to delays before the transfer could conclude - as a matter of fact it still hasn't.

hazel_davey

Ok, I've had the estimate back from LGPS:
£37.57 pa from USS (short service pension for less than 2 years service) - but apparently the CETV is calculated using their standard pension figures, which is interesting...

£209 pa with LGPS

Both have protected pension age, both will increase with CPI.

I think I'll go ahead with the transfer, unless anyone knows of a good reason why not? :-)