State Pension - Wife was refused her pension because older than husband by 5 months.

Bigwellies

My mother had her 60th birthday in June 1992 and my father November 1992.

Because my father was younger than my mother by proximity 5 months, my mother did not get her state pension until my father was 65.  Meaning my mother lost out on five (5) years of state pension.

This can not be correct, if mother was 60 a day after my father in 1992, she aparently I prisume would have been given her state pension at 60.

Remember women then got their state pension at 60 and men got their state pension at 65.

My mother had married (working) allowance.

Can she claim the 5 years not paid?

(Is correct year).

molerat

If she had no pension entitlement in her own right then she would have to wait until he was of pension age to get a pension based on his record. Back then it was the husband's responsibility to provide.

Emmia

Bigwellies said:

My mother had her 60th birthday in June 1992 and my father November 1992.

Because my father was younger than my mother by proximity 5 months, my mother did not get her state pension until my father was 65.  Meaning my mother lost out on five (5) years of state pension.

This can not be correct, if mother was 60 a day after my father in 1992, she aparently I prisume would have been given her state pension at 60.

Remember women then got their state pension at 60 and men got their state pension at 65.

My mother had married (working) allowance.

Can she claim the 5 years not paid?

(Is correct year).

1992 was more than 30 years ago. Why are you raising this question now?

p00hsticks

As molerat has said, if she qualified for a state pension in her own right, through paying full NI contributions while working, she would have been able to claim in as soon as she reached 60. But many women in those days either didn't stay in employment once married and with children, or if they did opted to pay the cheaper 'married women's stamp' which didn't build up their own State Pension rights. 

Instead they relied on their husbands working and could potentially claim something using their husbands NI record, but only when he reached his State Pension Age, 

And the NI credits for Home Responsibility Protection, now linked to child Benefit, will have been introduced too late to help your mother. 

They were very different times.....

Pollycat

molerat said:

If she had no pension entitlement in her own right then she would have to wait until he was of pension age to get a pension based on his record. Back then it was the husband's responsibility to provide.

A very succinct answer.

Silvertabby

When your mum opted to pay the married woman's stamp (reduced NI), she signed a declaration confirming that she knew that she wasn't paying for a State pension in her own right.  Instead, she would coat-tail on her husband's NI contributions - but only once he reached his State pension age (65).

Bigwellies

Seems unfare when her sister being 13 months older but her husband was six years older than her husband and so got her pension at 60 although her sister had not ever worked.  We are talking about non contribution pension.

So her sister got 5 years more pension.

My mother has said this for many years.

Many of her friends appeared to have not known of the consequence of marred NI allowance.

Thank you Molerat and Poosticks.

Aylesbury_Duck

Bigwellies said:

Seems unfare when her sister being 13 months older but her husband was six years older than her husband and so got her pension at 60 although her sister had not ever worked.  We are talking about non contribution pension.

So her sister got 5 years more pension.

My mother has said this for many years.

Many of her friends appeared to have not known of the consequence of marred NI allowance.

Thank you Molerat and Poosticks.

Not really, because as has been stated:  

Silvertabby said:

When your mum opted to pay the married woman's stamp (reduced NI), she signed a declaration confirming that she knew that she wasn't paying for a State pension in her own right.  Instead, she would coat-tail on her husband's NI contributions - but only once he reached his State pension age (65).

So her friends either didn't read what they signed, didn't understand it but signed anyway, or have simply forgotten over the many years until now.

It's not unfair, it's simply the different personal circumstances and the way they worked with the pension rules in place at the time. 

Silvertabby

Your mum's age is irrelevant - it's the day that your dad reached 65 that counted.

To be fair, my late aunt (State pension in her own right less than £1 per week) always regretted signing up for the married woman's stamp, but the reduction in NI was enough to make the difference between paying their mortgage or not.  But she said it couldn't have been clearer what she was signing up for - the declaration on the back of the application form spelled out that she would never accrue any further State pension in her own right, and that she would have to wait until her husband was 65 before she could make a claim from his NI contributions. 

Marcon

Bigwellies said:

My mother had her 60th birthday in June 1992 and my father November 1992.

Because my father was younger than my mother by proximity 5 months, my mother did not get her state pension until my father was 65.  Meaning my mother lost out on five (5) years of state pension.

This can not be correct, if mother was 60 a day after my father in 1992, she aparently I prisume would have been given her state pension at 60.

Remember women then got their state pension at 60 and men got their state pension at 65.

My mother had married (working) allowance.

Can she claim the 5 years not paid?

(Is correct year).

Given that your mum is now 92, I'm not sure she's going to change her mind about this - but as everyone here has tried to explain, she didn't get a state pension when she was 60 because she hadn't paid sufficient full rate NI contributions to qualify.

Plenty of married women happily signed up to pay reduced rate NI simply because it put more cash in their pay packets, with little thought for the long term impact. As Silvertabby has already pointed out, the form they had to sign clearly explained the impact this would have on their state pension - but the prospect of extra cash now (often badly needed) looked the better option, when retirement was just such a long way away...

Pollycat

Silvertabby said:

Your mum's age is irrelevant - it's the day that your dad reached 65 that counted.

To be fair, my late aunt (State pension in her own right less than £1 per week) always regretted signing up for the married woman's stamp, but the reduction in NI was enough to make the difference between paying their mortgage or not.  But she said it couldn't have been clearer what she was signing up for - the declaration on the back of the application form spelled out that she would never accrue any further State pension in her own right, and that she would have to wait until her husband was 65 before she could make a claim from his NI contributions. 

I started work 53 years ago aged 17.
I was astonished how many young women around my age opted to pay the reduced women's NI stamp.

Note to OP:
the key word is 'opted'.
Your Mum had a choice.