Does anyone know anything about the new state pension changes?

Well I hope a few people on this site START TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF NOTICE of what I have posted on here because IF it doesn't affect them yet, immediately then it most certainly IS GOING TO AFFECT THEM AT SOME TIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE because the current Government who are making these changes and ALL MPs who have voted them through to make them law are keeping quiet about the proposals because people are under the mis-apprehension that as from 2017 or thereabouts, everyone who reaches State Retirement Age is going to receive their Pension at the Enhanced Rate which IS NOT TRUE, Please see my posting above.The Government are DELIBERATELY MISLEADING people on this issue - prior to the next General Election - but ALL MPs KNOW this.

Invictus Can you post a link to somewhere you have seen this? It's news to me.

Invictus Maybe they get a rude response or no response if they shout while they are asking.

Reading the Single-Tier State Pension Fact sheet it sounds to me as though you may get less if you have been in a contracted-out scheme.

It says "If you have previously been contracted out of the additional State Pension, a deduction will be applied when we calculate your foundation amount. This reflects the fact that, whilst you were contracted out, you paid lower National Insurance contributions and your employer received a National Insurance rebate to fund your workplace pension. Therefore, you could have 35 qualifying years and not receive £144 per week.

The deduction is broadly equivalent in value to the workplace pension the rebate funded. This is consistent with the rules of the existing pension system. "

Thank you Elegran.
It certainly looks very complicated

I'm not surprised people have no idea what is what. I found that fact because I searched for what Invictus was wondering, but I couldn't explain anything else about it.

This has all just been discussed on Money Box Live
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03lpjxy

It did say that if you had contracted out of the second state pension, you wouldn't get the full single-tier pension, but there was no reference to people with private pensions being penalised.

The people answering the questions were described by Paul Lewis, the presenter, as a 'Dream Team' and they certainly sounded very knowledgeable as they answered listeners' questions.
They all agreed though that it is a complicated mess, and there will definitely be some winners and some losers.

I was lucky to be in the group where it changed from 40 qualifying years to 30 so I am now retired and in receipt of a full pension without the SERPS. It doesn't seem fair that people now have to wait so much longer. The raised amount of pension doesn't compensate for how tired we feel once in our 60s. My blood pressure has dropped considerably since retiring, so poor but healthier!

I agree Lyndy about feeling healthier in retirement. Having the time to get more exercise, and the reduction from high stress levels to very low stress levels have been the main benefit for me.
I think there will be an increase in chronic illness if people are forced to work into their late 60's.

It really is disgraceful and disrespectful the way this government treat us.
They keep moving the goalposts in relation to the State Pension Law so we have to work/wait longer to receive what is rightfully ours.

The fact that MP's, Judges and Civil Servants, who are within 10 years of normal retirement age, have been given transitional protection only rubs salt in the wounds.

Of course we are not the only ones affected by the discriminatory changes.

Our children and grandchildren will have little chance of gaining employment if we are being forced to work until we drop.

Please sign and share this petition is you disapprove of these changes.

thanks
Anne

you.38degrees.org.uk/p/statepensionlaw

I was born in February 1953, and according to the .gov.uk website, where I found a 'state pension calculator', I will become eligible for my state pension of £110 at the age of 62 years 9 months. My friend, who is one month younger than me, will qualify 4 months after me! No rhyme or reason!

So she'll be entitled to her state pension at 63. That makes sense to me, as she's a month younger than you. They have to stagger entitlement dates somehow, it's not going to follow on month by month...

As somebody suggested, why not call the DWP people in Newcastle? They were very helpful to me, having only paid married woman's contribution, but i asked them for my 'paid up pension'. They sent me a form for all my own and my husband's details (we were divorced years before) and on the strength of his payments I now receive about £150 per week. It's worth asking!

I was born 02/09/1953 and qualify for my state pension at 64 years and 2 months. As Ana said, they have to stagger the entitlement dates somehow, but it's the obvious lack of fairness that seems questionable.

My birthday's Sept '54 and I was told I'll get my pension in the month before my 66th birthday! Not happy!

Hi invictus

I don't know if you are still looking at this but I have been told you will only qualify for a £148 pension if you have been a member of a contracted in scheme.
I was in serps for part of my working life and now get about £135 a week state pension plus my works pension.
Half way through my working life we were taken out of SERPS and given a better employers pension from that date.
According to the circular overall we would get the same pension if we remained in serps but pay less in during our working lives.
I was however retired early and got a job which lasted 5 years and I was back in serps for that time and I was credited with contributions when I was a carer. I am not sure if that affected the serps element.

Mary

As one who wouldn't trust a politician (of any pursuasion) as far as I could throw them I decided that the best option (for me) was to draw my state pension as soon as humanly possible even though my brain told me I should defer it for a year or three if only to accrue the very generous interest rate applied which is far in excess of any available commercially in on or offshore investments.
I certainly do not believe that the new 30 year contribution rule will remain applicable for ever, I do believe it will increase back to somewhere near it was (39 years for women & 44 years for men) and the single tier pension proposed will certainly benefit some but will certainly be a detriment to many especially those with a decent serps and Graduated Pension entitlement. In my case I estimated a £50 per week loss if it was to be applied to any pension not yet in payment. My mistrust of any rhetoric to the contrary made my decision easy. I would imagine contributions will increase and benefits will reduce (in real terms) and the date at which the pension will become payable will certainly increase. No good news at all I'm afraid, at least not in my mind and I do believe pensionable age will increase to 70 and even 72 if pension spending increases as it has. I wish I could see it any other way but I can't. It's just a matter of time I feel.

I agree, ps, although I am not sure if deferring mine for a year or two would have helped. I was in the group that could retire at 60 but only got a full pension if I had paid in for 39 years. The year after I retired it changed to 30 years, but we did not know it at the time.
However, my husband retired at 65 and died after he had received his state pension for 6 months. My state pension then went up by £50 a week because of his contributions. Does that still happen now pensions are on individual contributions?

As far as I can make out pension based on husband's, wife's or civil partners contributions is £66 per week. Basic full entitlement pension based on your own or late spouse's or late civil partner's contributions is £110.15 per week. The over 80 pension which is paid if you receive no state pension or a state pension of less than £66 per week at age 80 as long as residency conditions are met. If you reach state pension age after 5 April 2013 and have paid graduated contributions for every £7.50 paid you get £0.1279.
All that is from page 16 of DWP's Benefit and pension rates booklet dated April 2013. I will not pretend to know what it all means although much of it is self explanetory but I am 65 and receive basic state pension, additional state pension (SERPS) and graduated retirement benefit. I did not opt out of anything so kept full entitlement for the years I was working.
As far as I remember the interest payable on a deferred pension is around 1% every 5 weeks so in the region of 11% per annum although I cannot see any mention of it in the DWP booklet which incidentally was picked up from a Jobcentreplus office. Hope that helps rather than confuses.

Sorry - the over 80 pension should say is £66 with an age addition of £0.25 whatever that means. The sleeping pill is kicking in so time I went up.

Exactly, although the changes to the State Pension Law will effect us all those women born on or after 6th April 1951 have been affected the most. They have suffereed 2 changes to their retirement age in the past few years.

Yet Mp's and Judges, who are within 10 years of normal pension age, were given transitional protection against the changes made to their pension scheme because (his a a quote from the MP's Pension reform document) :-

"This protection strives to be fair to members who are close to their expected retirement age and are less able to change their plans than younger members".

So it's one rule for them and one for us. It is discrimination.

If you disapprove of the changes to the State Pension Law please sign and share this petition. Thanks

thanks
Anne

I really do emapthise with you. The changes to the State Pension Law are unfair and unjust. Please sign and share this petition is you disapprove of these changes.

thanks
Anne

you.38degrees.org.uk/p/statepensionlaw

I wish that 30 qualifying years was the rule for all. The current number of qualifying years needed for a full pension is different for people who reached State Pension age before 6 April 2010 than it is for those who reach State Pension age on or after 6 April 2010. This means that women born before 6 April 1950 usually need 39 qualifying years, and men born before 6 April 1945 usually need 44 qualifying years. Women and men born after those dates usually only need 30 qualifying years.

For example a man born at 5 minutes past midnight on 6 April 1945 with 30 qualifying years gets a 100% pension, but his twin brother born 10 minutes earlier with the same 30 qualifying years gets only 30/44, i.e. 86%, of the full pension.

fnorman I agree it's a disgrace, also if you reach pension age before April 2016 you get a lower pension than if you were to retire after this date because then you would be entitled to the new state pension of £140.

ninny and fnorman have to agree with everything you have said.
I had 37 years NI payments when reaching pension age but needed 39 at the time so missed out on about £8per week I think. It would have been much fairer to have lowered the years required but ensured that those who had the required number (which was then set at 30) even if of state pension age before 2010 had been given the full entitlement.
now they want us to pay £25K to increase our SERPs to get an extra $25 per week. I think not.

I think it is plain to see that whatever changes are made to pension entitlement those changes will always result in a nett benefit to the treasury therefore by definition a nett loss to pensioners. The rhetoric and terminological inexactitudes, or lies if you prefer, we are bombarded with will fool some of the people some of the time but not all of us all of the time. There is of course the matter of SERPS which, for some of us, is a substancial proportion of our pension and that coupled with Graduated Retirement benefit can almost equal the basic state pension. I know mine is only £21 short of double the basic rate currently and there must be those with greater contributions than me. It is however a disgrace that our pensioners are paid relatively little of the sums they have paid in as we must never forget that in the case of NI contributions our employers have also paid in on our behalf. We currently pay 12% and the employer 13.8% assuming staff below the upper earnings threshold, if over that 2% is taken from the employee for earnings over the threshold. That's a lot of money paid in over the years so I ask those in the treasury spinning me hard luck stories to spare me and likewise spare themselves the embarrassment of trying to defend the indefencible. Is it not enough that we have the lowest pension rates in the whole of the EU.