Uk state pension been underpaid to women

[elusive]

This may be of intrest to some on here or their other halfs. worth checking if you are of a certain age etc.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dail ... nsion.html

[spanish_lad]

Nice, someone might be due some monies

[marios]

Just the tip of the iceberg, 50s women have been victimised when raising the pension age, Judicial appeal has been heard with the DWP giving there fairy tale, sorry their side of the story, tried to get the appeal thrown out when the court was in session and did not succeed, now awaiting judgement.

[Wicksey]

Could you imagine the bill if they had to repay all of us for our lost years of pension Marios? Just read: " the government has estimated that a reversal of the pension changes in the Acts of Parliament of 1995 and 2011 would cost £215bn over the period 2010-11 to 2025-26."

Can't see it happening ... unfortunately, I shall have to wait until I'm 66 to get mine despite believing up to the mid 1990s (when the 1995 Pensions Act came in) that I would get it at 60. I am lucky enough to get a civil service pension, but for those without any other private pensions then it's a long wait.

My MIL died a couple of years back but I see that heirs can claim if there's an underpayment, as per the OP's link. My FIL paid tens of thousands for her care, so it's worth checking to see if he is owed anything.

[marios]

Wicksey

The bill amount is of no consequence besides I think that 215 bn is overstated, I think they stated that after the first court case and it's calculated incorrectly but can't find link but anyway that is their problem, they have been raping the NI fund for years -

https://davidhencke.com/2018/07/19/reve ... e-pension/

[spanish_lad]

I imagine if I were already that age I would feel a bit.. cheated? But Im sorry, i dont really understand all the "problem" with the changing of the ages?

Back in the 50s and 60s people worked till they were 60, then retired, and most passed away in their 70s or 80s..

Now times have changed, and people are living longer, working longer etc, why shouldnt the age of retirement be raised in line with that?

I understand that people were told all their lives that you work and you retire at 60, but how can a law that was made 70 years ago be applied today, in 2020? Dont things change over time? technology gets better and working gets easier etc? Theres alot more older people in "easier" jobs that didnt exist in the 50s and 60s.. computers, telecomunications, office, etc etc.. not "hard work" type jobs really, why shouldnt people work for longer?

I suppose it would be nice if things changed and people didnt have to work past 60 years old, so that people could enjoy life a bit more and spend time with their families etc?

Sorry, I´m not trying to cause any arguments, I´m genuinely interested in peoples thoughts on this subject. I never knew my grandfathers while they were working, but my grandma worked well into her 70´s because she loved her job (she used to look after a "Dorma" apartment in central london - free bedlinen for life). We moved to spain when my parents werein their 50´s, and they lived for a few years without any "income" as it were, until his pension. My mum didnt live to see hers.

I suppose that it effects people that dont have any savings and dont own their own house.. people who are renting cant afford it etc?

This goes back to something that I´ve always had "drummed into me" - dont spend everything.. I only worked in the uk for 2? or 3? years - until we left, but I put 20% or so of what I earned in a seperate account each month, and I had that to play with when we arrived here, before i started working. Someone / a couple, that have been together for 40 years, putting 20% away each month.. should have a fair bit to live on?

[marios]

It's not as simple as that, you are looking at it from a male point of view, women in those days were classed as second class citizens, they did not have equality even today so you can imagine what it was like.Then you have the bringing up family etc. Women actually paid a higher NI for the privilege of retiring at 60 also they were not allowed to join workplace pension schemes , there are so so many ways women were treated unfairly I could write an essay, what about the 9 plus million free pension credits given to men over 60 right up to 2018 were women were promised the same treatment then the promise was renaged on by Conservatives. Before the judicial appeal the DWP gave a figure 3.6 million men given free pension credits, it was only after the appeal completed that a FOI request pinned the DWP to approx figure of 9 million plus, they kept that quiet. Let's get something straight here, this is not about pension age equalisation it's about notice given, 350000 men have been caught up in the pension age rise from 65 to 66, time to make a stand for all the young ones of the future as well, it's the worst state pension in European Union, if they had not plundered it to pay for bailouts etc it could have been so much better and it was not only Conservatives that did this but Labour as well.

[GerryinCajiz]

it's the worst state pension in European Union, if they had not plundered it to pay for bailouts etc it could have been so much better and it was not only Conservatives that did this but Labour as well.

Whilst I go along with your observations, the statement re plundering is not true. There is no government pension pot to plunder. Today's workers pay today's pensions. With an increasing pension population and a decreasing working population something had to be done, the situation is just not sustainable.

[marios]

Gerry maybe plundering is the wrong word maybe as Hencke said rape would be better, and I am not denying your points I have already said that, it's not getting proper notice, the DWP have already stated they did not inform everyone in fact at the original judicial review they stated they had no right to inform, unbelievable.

[Wicksey]

I suppose that it effects people that dont have any savings and dont own their own house.. people who are renting cant afford it etc?

This goes back to something that I´ve always had "drummed into me" - dont spend everything.. I only worked in the uk for 2? or 3? years - until we left, but I put 20% or so of what I earned in a seperate account each month, and I had that to play with when we arrived here, before i started working. Someone / a couple, that have been together for 40 years, putting 20% away each month.. should have a fair bit to live on?

I agree it does affect women who are perhaps on their own now and rent, or even have a mortgage to pay still. From what I've read, it has caused hardship for many women. Even for a couple, it may have changed their plans for the future if they both now have to wait until 66 (as in our case) to receive state pensions.

I admit that it does not really affect me as I gave up work at 42 and have been lucky enough to have an unearned income since then. We have always been savers and that's how we managed to retire so early. I just think it's the fact that the retirement age was set in stone for so long it did come as a bit of a shock to some people.

[elusive]

Unfortunatly when the ages changed theres always gonna be some who just miss out.its the nature of the beast. What bothers me as others have said is why the uk pension is the worst in europe,why were the public sector workers allowed to retire at 50 in final salary schemes (I'm alright jack) And how can you have a system where someone works and pays in for 50 years ends up with the same state pension as someone who only pays in the minimum. Once you have reached the qualifying years amount any extra paid in should mean a larger pension pot or you should be able to stop paying N.I contributions altogether and keep the extra to do with as you please.

The scheme was created and amended by those who have no need for it so dont care as they will have a large public pensions and be living in spain france etc etc long before they get their extra pocket money state pension which will prob get handed out to the grandkids!

[Wicksey]

Although I could have claimed my civil service pension at 50 it would have been greatly reduced. In fact I took it at 55 but again it was reduced to take account of the fact I claimed it 5 years early. I was on a scheme that no longer exists and I don't think it is an option now. I was always told that because we had a good pension scheme our pay rates were lower. Many of my colleagues eventually left after years of training to join the private sector and doubled their pay. My OH couldn't get his earlier than 60, being in a different government department to me.

If you continue to work past pension age then you no longer pay NI contributions (although the employer still pay their percentage) so it would be quite unusual to have paid for 50 years' NIC. The thing I found the worst was the fact that there is an upper limit of pay for national insurance contributions. Again, I'm going back to the 1990s when I was working, but whether they earned 26k or 2.6m an employee wouldn't pay any more NIC. I think the upper limit is around 50k now.

[elusive]

I have a family member who paid in just under 50 years worked from leaving school at 16 till 65. I would think thats pretty common for older generations

Certainly alot of public sector are on low wages. Had a friend who could go at 50/55 but said he couldnt afford to as his pension was hardly anything. The thing though he didnt realise was that if he were doing the same job in the private sector i doubt he would have even had a pension to start with and of course it should be reduced if taken early..yeah i agree many final salary in the private and public have gone now as its impossible to fund. Dont understand the lower wages for better pension scheme though. So whos paying for it? The tax payer paying so police etc can retire at 50 then paying again to recruit the replacements.you would have to have paid a heck of alot in to retire at 50 in the private sector on a average wage job which was/is the norm in many public sector jobs. Funded by those who have to work until 65 and beyond! Nice if you can get it! A guy i use to work with was an ex fire fighter. Made to retire a 50 yet had the fitness levels of a 30 year old so no issue there. Didnt want to retire. So he leaves on a pension amount where he didnt have to work again if he didnt want to. So aswell as paying for that a new fire fighter has to be hired and trained and paid. Totally crazy.

The spanish system from what iv read seems alot fairer. Paid more in you get more back. I guess re N.I contributions is everyone was/is getting the same state pension so ppl feel why should i pay more. If it were like spain someone paying more because they have a higher wage or because they worked longer gets more back.

Also here you can retire a year or two early if you are made redundant and have paid the minimum years. Something the uk should do when you see ppl in their early/mids 60's losing their jobs and its a joke they end up having to apply for jobs while they count down waiting for a pension that they were prob due years earlier after working more than the 30/35 years needed.

[Wicksey]

" Dont understand the lower wages for better pension scheme though. "

Mine was a non-contributory pension scheme so I didn't pay for it as such, only by having lower wages. My OH paid 6% of his pay into his, so his general pay scales were higher than mine. My friend has retired at 50 from the fire service and now works part time elsewhere. He was high up in management, so it seems silly to have to retire.

[dxf]

Hola,

I think some have missed the point; a lot of the affected women have stopped work a few years early in the expectation that their savings will last them until the pension kicks in. The rug was taken from under their feet as they now have an extra five or six years to survive on their savings.

If a woman is working, then having to work five or six years extra means they still have an income and can improve their pension pot. It is not what they expected and that causes stress.

I retired with nearly ten years to go before my old age pension cut in BUT I had done my sums and had savings to cover the "missing years" plus my government pension paid at 62 years old and another private pension paid at 63 years old. Needless to say, I didn't take any pension early as to do so would reduce the pension by a massive amount.

Davexf