Martin's suggestion for winter fuel allowance

Ildhund

Thank you for a sensible post from one of those affected by Robber Reeve's decision. I too am a pensioner, and I admit that I found the generous bonuses paid in the last couple of years slightly embarrassing. The Winter Fuel Payment (WFP) together with the £150 Warm Home Discount (WHD) should just about cover my heating expenses this winter, apart from the electric shower which alone gobbles up 2.2 kWh. 

Pension Credit (PC) is supposed to ensure that those who for whatever reason aren't entitled to the full state pension (SP) still have an income deemed to be sufficient to live on. I wonder whether you are eligible for PC but don't claim it ("[I] did not contribute a huge amount ...  SP ... is my only income."). The difference between the two is IMO insignificant, especially when compared to the difference from two years ago, since when both SP and PC have risen by ~£36 p.w.

pseudodox

Ildhund said:

Thank you for a sensible post from one of those affected by Robber Reeve's decision. I too am a pensioner, and I admit that I found the generous bonuses paid in the last couple of years slightly embarrassing. The Winter Fuel Payment (WFP) together with the £150 Warm Home Discount (WHD) should just about cover my heating expenses this winter, apart from the electric shower which alone gobbles up 2.2 kWh. 

Pension Credit (PC) is supposed to ensure that those who for whatever reason aren't entitled to the full state pension (SP) still have an income deemed to be sufficient to live on. I wonder whether you are eligible for PC but don't claim it ("[I] did not contribute a huge amount ...  SP ... is my only income."). The difference between the two is IMO insignificant, especially when compared to the difference from two years ago, since when both SP and PC have risen by ~£36 p.w.

No - I don't qualify for PC because even from modest past incomes I managed to salt away savings for unforseen emergencies, which so far have not occurred.  That plus a small inheritance gives me the means to pay for urgent house or car repairs and things like private dental treatment.  The rises in interest rates on my savings pot in recent years "tops up" my SP without having had to touch more than a small amount of capital.  And of course the WFA was a great help.  But I am not resentful of those who were perhaps not so savvy as to save for the future and now find claiming benefits is the only way to sustain even a basic existence.

Maybe I missed something, but has anything been said about abolishing the derisory £10 Pensioners Christmas Bonus?  This must cost more in administration than it is worth, especially as it gets processed as a separate payment rather than added on to everyone's December pension payout.  I always forward mine to a charity.

born_again

wrf12345 said:

The simple solution remains, get rid of the WFA completely and get rid of energy standing charges, with the energy companies absorbing some of the increased unit cost in recognition of the way the govn helped them through the energy crisis (if Labour had been in power it would probably have let them go bust and nationalized them for "free", which will probably happen with some of the water companies). This would give the govn a nice boost in the popularity stakes as well. 

I guess you are too young to remember the pre privatisation days...

Costs were no better, infrastructure was no better. You only have to look at how bad many government sectors are to realise that public ownership is not the solve all ill's many seem to think it is.

End of the day, public or private ownership. Only one group pay's for it. Which is us mere mortals..

wrf12345

"So, as usual, the "simple solution" is "get someone else to pay for it"." Nope, unit cost would rise but not as much as Ofgem and its energy company cohorts would like or claim. I do wonder what the workforce at Ofgem, almost tripled over the past three years, actually do for their money, surely not posting on this site... no, I am sure not even Ofgem would stoop to that.

BarelySentientAI

wrf12345 said:

"So, as usual, the "simple solution" is "get someone else to pay for it"." Nope, unit cost would rise but not as much as Ofgem and its energy company cohorts would like or claim. I do wonder what the workforce at Ofgem, almost tripled over the past three years, actually do for their money, surely not posting on this site... no, I am sure not even Ofgem would stoop to that.

So yes, someone else would pay.

Or do you think that somehow removing a benefit, abolishing standing charges, and raising unit costs magically makes everyone still pay exactly the same as they are at the moment?

Must be a pretty weak argument, even in your own head, if you have to resort to slyly insinuating that posters who disagree with you are being paid.

MattMattMattUK

wrf12345 said:

"So, as usual, the "simple solution" is "get someone else to pay for it"." Nope, unit cost would rise but not as much as Ofgem and its energy company cohorts would like or claim. 

You seem to be under the delusion that there are huge profits being made that can somehow be cut to give you cheaper energy, there are not.

wrf12345 said:

I do wonder what the workforce at Ofgem, almost tripled over the past three years, 

The annual budget of Ofgem is £21 million, so it costs each household around 70p a year.

wrf12345 said:

actually do for their money, surely not posting on this site... no, I am sure not even Ofgem would stoop to that.

You have done this multiple times, insinuating that those who do not agree with you are industry shills, suppler/Ofgem plants etc. If you cannot make a valid argument and need to resort to making wild, incorrect claims, perhaps it would be better not to comment.

Scot_39

Ildhund said:

Thank you for a sensible post from one of those affected by Robber Reeve's decision. I too am a pensioner, and I admit that I found the generous bonuses paid in the last couple of years slightly embarrassing. The Winter Fuel Payment (WFP) together with the £150 Warm Home Discount (WHD) should just about cover my heating expenses this winter, apart from the electric shower which alone gobbles up 2.2 kWh. 

Pension Credit (PC) is supposed to ensure that those who for whatever reason aren't entitled to the full state pension (SP) still have an income deemed to be sufficient to live on. I wonder whether you are eligible for PC but don't claim it ("[I] did not contribute a huge amount ...  SP ... is my only income."). The difference between the two is IMO insignificant, especially when compared to the difference from two years ago, since when both SP and PC have risen by ~£36 p.w.

Which state pension and for how many has it risen that full c£36.

In reality there is no one such thing as just the one SP  - there are 2 major systems - split in 2016.

Reading that last sentence - you seem to think everyone already retired gets the full new state pension.  They don't. 

Millions currently in 70s or older never will at present - those who retired before Apr 2016.

Need to find more upto date figures but this 2019 article - only 44% on new system did.  Thats even worse it says than old state where 65% did (if inc other benefits - s2p ?)

https://www.independent.co.uk/money/spend-save/pension-state-dwp-income-retirement-money-women-a9203726.html

The basic state pension - the old one - is nearly £50 below the single UC top up (£169.50 max vs £218.15) and has only increased £27 max in 2 years.

That c£50 strikes me as very significant difference.

Not everyone has been moved onto the new state pension methodolgy or rates - those pre switch in 2016 - men over 73  (dob before 6 Apr 1951)  / 71 women (Apr 53) -  remain on old scheme.

As such the oldest pensioners those likely to be even more disproportionately impacted by PC thrshold WFP  cuts, as heating need likely linked to age - see lower increases and much lower rates - but the same fuel price rate increases. More so those over 80 - who may lose full £300 wfp.


The new pension - if get full entitlement - £221.20. Again ax above in past - not everyone gets the full amount.

And the problem with the latest rumoured sop to disgruntled labour MPs - to keep council HSF going - is the same people who need but dont claim PC - will not claim help from the councils either.

The dwp or it's forebears have ran regular campaigns to increase take up of PC - Reeves should know this - that they have consistently failed to reach 100,000s - (edit 880,000 according to todays bbc Powell no uturn article and plan for a  week of action to resolve? ) that miraculously she now thinks will work faultlessly.

On health impacts of cold - the nhs has even held pilot schemes effectively prescribing heat /:energy bill help to the vulnerable - with some positive results - in a few poorer areas.

And as to WFP and the ultimate health benefit / impact - death.

c25,000 annual deaths from cold nearly halved - c12,000 lower - after universal WFP introduced.

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/reports-and-publications/reports-and-briefings/money-matters/rb_april15_winter_fuel_payment_briefing.pdf

How many of that 12,000 will we see return ?
How many more will be hospitalised or need gp help in winter with cold related ailments - potentially far outweighing any savings ?
I hospital bed for 1st night = c£350 exc treatment 2023, nearer £600 inc diagnosis, treatment in 2020 study.

If true Reeves has announced this without a detailed impact study and it does back fire - this could be the next big public health enquiry scandal.


There are better ways to implement this.  

Delay for impact study.
 
Make the wfp taxable (*) or introduce a similar reclaim to the HICBC, in fact why not revert the hicbc change from April (estimated cost over £500m pa this tax year and growing ) and the Wfp black hole will be much smaller.

(*) The c6m paye taxpayers rich enough (22 hmrc data, 12m over 65 21 census) (taxable income) to pay tax will repay 20 to 45% for little effort.

Many of the very richest retirees - those targeted with envious green eyes by left -  may not even bother claiming state pension and so wfp with it.  It's not automatic - you have to actually apply.


Single PC rise to £218.15pw, c £11.3k pa or even full new at £221 - £11.5k is still over £10,000 pa below minimum wage.  It really isn't a comfortable living.

Ildhund

Scot_39 said:

Which state pension and for how many has it risen that full c£36.
The basic state pension - the old one - is nearly £50 below the single UC top up (£169.50 max vs £218.15) and has only increased £27 max in 2 years.

Please take the time to trawl through the acres of verbiage that describes the state pension schemes. The figure you quote - £169.50 - is the maximum for those on the old system. It is less for those without the full whack of NI contributions. I get £71.13 p.w., and I don't think it gets much lower than that.

£218.15 p.w. is what the government says is the minimum a single man needs to live on. That's why someone in a similar situation to mine is eligible for a supplementary payment (PC) to make up the difference between SP (£71.13) and what we're deemed to need (£218.15). 

Two years ago, the minimum was £182.60. The increase since then is £35.55. 

For those getting the new SP, those two figures are £185.15 and £36.05.

Yes, the withdrawal of WFP from the better-off will punish those whose sole income isn't more than the new SP. They will still be getting more than the minimum required, but the difference between their weekly income and mine will be 79.6p. That won't kill anybody.

I wonder how many men under 73 are in this situation, where 80p a week is the difference between life and death.

Scot_39

The latest figure as my edit - on today's BBC related No U turn article - quotes a DWP estimate of 880,000 entitled not claiming.   Age, sex, singles / couples ?

Then there is the just aboves - likely to suffer too - which Age UK puts a figure of around 2 million in total on.

So we don't know what the 880,000s current margin is against PC up lifted income.

[Or how far above it the age uk other 1.1m at a guess are - xp, £x or £10s pw. ]

You might have faith - as our new supposedly "better for working classes labour" leaders appear to - in DWP identifying, contacting, getting the forms out and completed - forms that many might need help with - returned and processed in order to enroll 880,000 on PC before the winter.

Having dealt with DWP on behalf of both parents - lets just say I have my doubts.

Edit

Which might be better for govt finances if they fail - as the DWP say its worth £3,900 in that article (on average) - £75 per week

So 880,000 x £3900 = £3.4 bn

The standard WFP alone - £200 - £300 over 80 - being cut for c10m approx - say majority sub 80 - 10m*£225 say - £2.25bn  (but that is also the rate for couples - so in reality much less of a saving - is that where the £1.4bn figure comes from - simply the projected payments - based on household mix ?)

IIRC the projected saving £1.4 bn

So not sure why different (have they included last winters CofL as well - another £200-300 - or assuming lower or fewer PC converts - or just precise knowledge of totals - given it's same for couples and singles ?)

Have they simply failed to add the additional PC cost ?

MikeJXE

No idea where all these figures are coming from but my pension is £267.40 including about a fiver from my late wife

Why such large differences ? 

I’m 83 and on the old pension 

Worked from 15 till 63, some paye some self employed, full NI contributions