State Pension forecast anomaly

julicorn

molerat said:

julicorn said:

Just to add one more variation into the mix (apologies if this layout has been posted already and I've missed it), I've only got 2 bars. I think it's a lot clearer than what I used to be shown though. 

That is the standard "before they messed with it and have now gone back to" version of a not yet full forecast. 

And do you realise that 24th year will only give you 7p, 23 will get you to £221.14

I honestly only checked mine a few weeks ago (and sometime last year) and could have sworn it didn't give me the first bar, only the big message about being on track for the £221.20 which I always found a bit confusing tbh!
Thanks for the heads up about year 24, I shall keep a close eye on it right at the end  

molerat

julicorn said:

molerat said:

julicorn said:

Just to add one more variation into the mix (apologies if this layout has been posted already and I've missed it), I've only got 2 bars. I think it's a lot clearer than what I used to be shown though. 

That is the standard "before they messed with it and have now gone back to" version of a not yet full forecast. 

And do you realise that 24th year will only give you 7p, 23 will get you to £221.14

I honestly only checked mine a few weeks ago (and sometime last year) and could have sworn it didn't give me the first bar, only the big message about being on track for the £221.20 which I always found a bit confusing tbh!
Thanks for the heads up about year 24, I shall keep a close eye on it right at the end  

Here is one from 21-22, the same format

eskbanker

RogerPensionGuy said:

The link below is certainly food for though and planning I feel. 

Currently taking of age 71 down the road, these roads can get shorter and shorter unfortunately. 

***

https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/cost-of-living/state-pension-age-could-rise-30978270

Typical lazy recycling of old news by the Reach titles, probably automated - the report they refer to was published over a year ago:

https://ilcuk.org.uk/ageing-populations-forced-to-increase-state-pension-age-to-71-by-2050-to-maintain-dependency-ratio/

1957DfurdPensionist

Back to the main point of the thread - of course we all now realise these forecasts assumed from their outset that NI contributions would be made continuously until SPa, from the date given in the forecast (i.e. originally two 5th Aprils previous to the date of viewing the webpage right up until the 5th April prior to SPa to be exact).

So those who have read into the forecasts that they can now take it easy at age 50 or 60 on the basis that their SP is already optimised and sorted might need to rethink quickly!

And those that assert that the Treble-Sized Font Green Box number was always clear communication of the true status of the individual's future pension perhaps may consider one of the more baffling features, which is that "the most that you can get" or "the most that you can increase your forecast to" (both phrases have been used at different dates) could go backwards in the space of three or four years between forecasts, with no mention of gaps or Voluntary Contributions in say October 2016, but the possibility of VC's did sort of get a mention as a footnote in mine by February 2020 (at which time the Green Box seemingly was not being used). No mention of course of the sort of arithmetic involved that reveals such quirks as 24 more years to a full entitlement but the 24th year only buys 7p per week extra Yes so the communication via that webpage over the years has been truly, shall we say, enthralling to behold ?

M4rtyman

OK - OP here. I am now confused. The early posts in this thread say that the discrepancy is all due to the S2P part of my pension pre-2016, and it should be fine.
However, subsequent posts seem to be hinting that "the big green box" may not be telling me the full truth.

As I said, I currently have 33 years full NI payments (from 1989 to 2022). Should I just call them to get some clarification?

(And BTW - I don't think I've ever seen "multiple bars". For the last few years, the image below is all that has been displayed)

jem16

M4rtyman said:

OK - OP here. I am now confused. The early posts in this thread say that the discrepancy is all due to the S2P part of my pension pre-2016, and it should be fine.
However, subsequent posts seem to be hinting that "the big green box" may not be telling me the full truth.

As I said, I currently have 33 years full NI payments (from 1989 to 2022). Should I just call them to get some clarification?

(And BTW - I don't think I've ever seen "multiple bars". For the last few years, the image below is all that has been displayed)

The reason you don’t have multiple bars is because you’ve reached the maximum you can get and cannot improve it. You don’t need to call them. 

M4rtyman

I've just seen the post below on the HMRC forums, which kind of mirrors my own query

jem16

M4rtyman said:

I've just seen the post below on the HMRC forums, which kind of mirrors my own query

It doesn’t appear to mirror your own query. That person still requires another 3 years and has completely the wrong understanding of needing 35 years.

You have no need to worry. Your pension is at the maximum and cannot be improved. Nor can it decrease. 

1957DfurdPensionist

jem16 said:

M4rtyman said:

I've just seen the post below on the HMRC forums, which kind of mirrors my own query

It doesn’t appear to mirror your own query. That person still requires another 3 years and has completely the wrong understanding of needing 35 years.

You have no need to worry. Your pension is at the maximum and cannot be improved. Nor can it decrease. 

Agreed that it is not similar to M4rtyman's case, but I am confused as hell about the pictured HMRC community example, aren't you, @jem16? How can anyone currently aged 44 who has already worked in 26 + 2 of them only need 3 more for a full new state pension, i.e. presumably with a total of only 29 years as the +2 are partial years? You say there is "completely the wrong understanding of needing 35 years" - can you enlighten us on what would be a completely proper understanding, please?  As someone with 36 years contributions who has recently paid for 7 more and still can't quite get to a current £221.20 pw, I honestly can't for a moment currently believe there was any rigorous logic in the rules and calculations, so might you do thousands of us a favour and try to reassure us with what you know?

Dazed_and_C0nfused

1957DfurdPensionist said:

jem16 said:

M4rtyman said:

I've just seen the post below on the HMRC forums, which kind of mirrors my own query

It doesn’t appear to mirror your own query. That person still requires another 3 years and has completely the wrong understanding of needing 35 years.

You have no need to worry. Your pension is at the maximum and cannot be improved. Nor can it decrease. 

Agreed that it is not similar to M4rtyman's case, but I am confused as hell about the pictured HMRC community example, aren't you, @jem16? How can anyone currently aged 44 who has already worked in 26 + 2 of them only need 3 more for a full new state pension, i.e. presumably with a total of only 29 years as the +2 are partial years? You say there is "completely the wrong understanding of needing 35 years" - can you enlighten us on what would be a completely proper understanding, please?  As someone with 36 years contributions who has recently paid for 7 more and still can't quite get to a current £221.30 pw, I honestly don't for a moment believe there is any logic in the rules and calculations, so will you do thousands of us a favour and try to reassure us with what you know?

If you were a high earner and had never been contracted out you could have accrued plenty of State Pension when the rules changed.

https://www.gov.uk/additional-state-pension

Meaning you need minimum post 2016 years to reach the standard new State Pension (currently £221.20/week).

It could be argued this person is a loser under the new system.  Where as you are generally considered a winner.