State pension : pensioner supporting younger wife

djohn2002uk

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Not by a person who does not work through choice .

I still don't see why they shouldn't wait until retirement age to get anything, like anyone else would have to.

However, as I say, the Government says something different so my opinion is immaterial.

It's not the wife who hasn't worked who's "entitled" it's the husband who has worked who's "entitled".
You just cannot stop bleating about someone else getting something they are obviously "entitled" to.
Please give it a rest.

bryanb

Almost correct, in fact I have also not worked but I have paid NI contributions and have a full payments record.
I entered this thread to advise Sterlingtimes how it was possible to claim for a "dependent" (oops! sorry ladies) I am perfectly happy that my claim is above board, the government makes the rules, all we have to do is follow them. Thats all.

seven-day-weekend

Yes, I agree it is above board; never suggested otherwise.:D

seven-day-weekend

djohn2002uk wrote: »

It's not the wife who hasn't worked who's "entitled" it's the husband who has worked who's "entitled".
You and Margaret just cannot stop bleating about someone else getting something they are obviously "entitled" to.

Please give it a rest.

I have Aspie tendenceies and am obsessive about things being fair.

Don't mean to upset anyone, I know that it is the rules made by Government and that no-one is committing fraud.

But it grates on me that people below retirement age who are capable of and able to work, but exercise their right not to, should get what amounts to a retirement pension.

That's the way I'm wired. I like things to be fair and in neat packages and this doesn't fit into my 'fairness' box.

That's all.

God bless everyone. Sorry if I've upset you.

EdInvestor

bryanb wrote: »

I entered this thread to advise Sterlingtimes how it was possible to claim for a "dependent" (oops! sorry ladies) I am perfectly happy that my claim is above board, the government makes the rules..

Am I right in thinking that a woman receiving state pension can claim a dependant's allowance for a non-working spouse below (male) state retirement age?

Is the allowance reduced if the dependant has other income ( eg a small pension) and if so how does that work, is it pound for pound?

bryanb

Yes a woman can claim for a dependent exactly the same. The dependent may have income up to around £58 (please check exact figure) After that amount no allowance is payable.Hopefully this thread will help a few people to get their entitlement. The pension service is very reluctant to give advice, in fact they denied it existed 2-3 times to me.

bryanb

Further to above post. It is the dependent's income that must be less than £58 Approx. The claimant's income is irrelevant. The pension service tried to prevent me claiming based on my income, anyone claiming will need to be careful of this

EdInvestor

Thanks bryanb, very helpful.

IMHO the adult dependant's allowance makes more sense if viewed in the context of the married woman's stamp.It may well be that many of the female "dependants" for whom this is claimed did in fact work during their lives but failed to accrue any pension rights ecause they paid the wrong stamp.

We also should bear in mind that HRP only came in 1974, so anyone off work before that got no pension rights even if they paid the full stamp, plus many women found it hard to notch up a full year's NI contribution because of the way the system worked.

One also suspects the existence of the allowance is the reason why so many people think there is a "married couple's pension".

The changes in 2010 are to be welcomed because at last all these anomalies which discriminate against women will be removed.But in the meantime the allowance seems more like an arrangment to at least partally redress some of the historical anomalies, rathet than a freebie for the undeserving.

Sterlingtimes

margaretclare wrote: »

If you look at what I actually wrote, it was mainly the sexist terminology and the demeaning assumptions behind this discussion that I object to, NOT the fact that someone is getting something.

It may have been tongue-in-cheek when the OP wrote things like 'sending his wife out to work' or 'paying for the whims of a younger wife'. Some men still think these comments are funny. Personally I think we should all have moved on beyond this puerile kind of humour.

Margaret

Demeaning? Sexist? Purile?

I thought that I had taken some care to explore the underlying situation.

My use of language was partly tongue-in-cheek, but it reflects the reality of the situation.

Up until the time when the legislation changes the wife and husband may choose to operate as a unit (a couple). When the husband reaches retirement age, the husband may retire and the husband will receive from the state a supplement to support his wife. The state says, "you have earned your retirement, you have the right to retire and enjoy your old age without working, and we will ensure that you can provide financially for your wife."

This has been the way in which society has dealt with this problem for many decades.

When the legislation changes, that choice will be withdrawn. And the couple together will be £3,000 per annum worse off at today's value. Then the situation will arise where either the wife or the husband or both will be required to work to plug the income gap. The state now say, "you have earned you retirement, however, your wife has not. You will have to decide together how you are going to redress the shortfall unless you wish to starve. Perhaps you should have thought about this prior to retirement."

In the situations above, the wife and husband could be reversed.

I thought that there was much merit in the state supporting couples and families rather than individuals. Is this view of the world really demeaning, sexist and purile?

bryanb

Consider this - A divorcee of 60yrs who has never paid a NI contribution can claim a state pension based on ex spouses contributions. As soon as pension is established can then go through civil partnership ceremony with 18year old who has no income and has never paid NI. This person is entitled to dependents allowance!
A man has to wait till 65yrs but can do the same thing!
This isn't a loophole-people do it with "brides" from certain far east countries.