Home Responsibilities Protection pre 1978

bella47

Hello, I have searched for quite a while to try to find a post with exactly my query but haven't found it yet so here goes.I have been told by the pension office that I will not receive any HRP for the years I spent at home looking after two of my children between 1967 and 1970 and again between 1974 and 1977, because HRP only started in 1978.This means that I only have 31 full contributory years ( as I also had three years at the reduced rate).I collected my state pension in May 2007 at the age of 60. I now hear that from 2010, only 30 years NI contributions are needed for a full state pension. This means that I have not only missed out on HRP,I am now going to miss out on the reduced number of qualifying years!Does anyone know of any steps I can take to gain more qualifying years or level the playing field in any way? It does seem extremely unfair as I have worked for most of my adult life despite bringing up four children.
Bella

Dithering_Dad

At least you gained by being able to retire at 60, rather than 68 like some poor souls.

Did you pay full NI for the last 6 years? If not then you will be able to make class 3 NI contributions to 'buy' these years.

The other alternative is to defer taking your state pension and it will therefore be a larger amount.

It seems unfair though that they didn't phase in the contribution years like they phased in the retirement age (i.e. slowly dropping from 39 years to 30 years between 2010 to 2046, as the retirement age increases from 60 to 68).

This will probably be the next bit of ill-conceived legislation that comes back to haunt Labour - just like the removal of the 10% tax bracket.

EdInvestor

If you have already paid NI back to 1997, then there's nothing more you can do at this point.There was an effort to get the Givt to allow people in your situation to top up missing years, but it waqsn;t approved.

Presumably you are being paid S2P/Serps where available, or have a contracted out pension instead?

bella47

Thank you Dithering Dad and Edinvestor for your replies.Yes, I am all paid up NI contribution wise for the years they would allow me to buy (ie from 1998 onwards), it's 1977-1980 I would have liked to have bought, as I was paying a reduced married woman's contribution for those years.Also, probably like all the other women who had children before 1978,I didn't know I wouldn't be eligible for the HRP as everybody I worked with always said that if you claimed family allowance for any year you didn't work, it would be credited to you.Yes,I also have some serps and an NHS pension(16 years). Yes, I do feel for those who cannot claim a pension until they are 65 or 68, and those who continue to pay full NI contributions for years after they have paid enough for a full state pension.Good luck to you and thanks again for your response.
Bella

margaretclare

HRP didn't exist before April 1978.

EdInvestor

margaretclare wrote: »

HRP didn't exist before April 1978.

HRP has been a bit of a con IMHO.Like the OP to get it, a woman retiring now would have to have had her children over the age of 30.Ten years ago it was over the age of 40. As we know a generation ago, women had babies much younger anyway.

At least you gained by being able to retire at 60.

This is used as an excuse by so many people, especially the politicians and officials..

Yet when you take a close look at the women's state pension what do you find, despite the fact a working women pays the same NI contribution rates as a man?

#There is no attached married man's pension (worth a further 60%)
#There is no adult dependant's pension (ditto)
#There is no survivor 's pension (paid at 100%)
#The woman's partner cannot inherit her SERPS if she dies before reaching pension age(the Govt snaffles it, outrageous!)
#There are no pension rights for the woman's previous spouses (paid at up to 100% per spouse, numbers unlimited)
#There is no retired person's tax allowance attached

Let's look at the numbers, asssuming for simplicity that the BSP is currently worth 5k pa.

The women starts 5 years early and thus has 25k in hand when the man and his wife start at 65.Assuming they both remain alive, within just over 8 years, both the woman and the couple will both have received the same amount of money (ignoring the possibility that he may have additional ex wives also claiming 100% pensions courtesy of his NI conts) and thus have hoovered up masses more..

From then on, the married man and wife's pensions will outstrip the single woman to the turn of 60% extra a year, cumulative.When the man dies, his widow will receive 100% of his basic state pension, despite possibly having paid no NI contributions whatsoever. The widower of the woman will get diddley squat.

IMHO men (especially widowers) should be complaining about how badly they are treated as partners of women over 60 retired under the old rules, not focussing on the earlier payment advantage, which is rapidly overtaken by the vastly more well-endowed male state pension.

Wee_Bargain_Hunter

You could try ringing The Pensions Advisory Service - the guy from there is on Working Lunch quite a lot - but here's a link to the details.

bella47

Very informative post Edinvestor, but what is IMHO? I know it's going to be something obvious but cannot think what! I knew pensions were unfair but didn't realise quite how biased they were. I had assumed my husband would inherit at least half (it used to be all)my serps should I pop off first.I am still in the process of appealing against my pension award( I think it should be 34 years and they say it's 32). After the initial rejection of my reasons I have not been given a Tribunal date( the next step up)which was promised as long ago as July 2007!I have written three reminders, all of which have been ignored. Perhaps they think I'll get fed up and go away.No chance!
Bella

EdInvestor

IMHO=In My Humble Opinion, internet speak

I too thought the Serps could be passed on, but apparently not. :mad:

margaretclare

EdInvestor wrote: »

IMHO=In My Humble Opinion, internet speak

I too thought the Serps could be passed on, but apparently not. :mad:

It depends on your age.

http://www.thepensionservice.gov.uk/pdf/serps/serpsl1jan08.pdf

If the woman was born before October 1942 her widower can inherit 100% of her SERPS.

However, few women had good enough jobs to accrue much SERPS. Those women who had decentish jobs - nursing, teaching etc - will probably have been contracted-out anyway into e.g. the NHS pension scheme.

I have a smallish amount of SERPS which, because of our age, DH can inherit. He has a much larger amount - comparable to his SRP - because he was never contracted-out into any employer's scheme.

HTH

EdInvestor

margaretclare wrote: »

It depends on your age.

http://www.thepensionservice.gov.uk/pdf/serps/serpsl1jan08.pdf

[/quote]


Not entirely. If a woman dies before reaching state pension age, her husband/partner cannot inherit her SERPS.