no income

Thanks suziewoozie

Working age benefits PIP and ESA.
Age 65+ Attendance Allowance
Needs updated- but that's another thread.

I've already told the OP she should apply for ESA. But I would assume if she gets PIP she already knows that, and has either got it or been refused.
It just sounds to me like the OP has a low income, like many others.

ESA is the benefit for people who are too ill or disabled to work.
NI contributions are automatically credited, whilst in receipt of this benefit.
It ceases on reaching state pension age.

Call there are two categories of disability benefits - one category is for people who cannot work because of their disability - the names keep changing and the rules but basically you have to show you cannot work - short term or long term. The second category are benefits to meet the extra costs of being disabled - now PIP but previously AA and Mobility Allowance. You don’t necessarily qualify for benefits in both categories but of course you may.

I know of a lady who uses it to pay someone to do her ironing, something she finds difficult to do.
She also gets her hair washed at the hairdressers, as she finds great difficulty washing her hair.

The young man I know, gets the mobility component, as he is unable to cope with public transport, due to his autism, so runs an automatic car to allow him to get to work.

I think there are many misconceptions about PIP.

My BIL, was on dyalisis, had heart failure, cancer and diabetes
He couldn't walk fifty yards, but still thought he wouldn't qualify for PIP
In the end he agreed to apply, after it took my husband and SIL to push him upstairs to the loo and he realised he needed a stair lift.
He died the day his award letter came in. ?
He should have applied years ago, but thought it was only for ' disabled people', not people like him.

Sorry, I digress.
The OP should apply for ESA, if she is unable to work.

I do not conflate having a disability with being unable to work but assumed that PIP was paid to someone unable to work through illness or disability.

A change of rules, then, from the days of Incapacity Benefit.
I am not up-to-date.

Yes Marydoll you are absolutely right. PIP is to contribute towards the extra costs of being disabled - eg if you get the mobility component you could use it for taxis or a motability vehicle. The daily living component could be used for paying someone to come in and prepare a meal for you or do some cleaning. Of course you can spend it how you want - that’s your choice. The recent changes to PIP have seen some people having it withdrawn thereby losing their motability vehicle thereby not being able to get to work and losing their job. It’s a pity that people so often conflate having a disability with not being able to wok. It all depends - David Blunkett couldn't drive a bus but he was Home Secretary.

Receiving PIP doesn't always mean you are unfit to work.
You can still be working and receive it.
I know someone, who is receiving it and he is in employment.
It is not means tested, nor taxable.

Just realised OP is in receipt of PIP. That's hers. Sorry I don't know what more she wants. I'm off.

If thought that the OP is in receipt of PIP so presumably she is considered not fit enough to work hellymart

Which means there is money coming in.
I think this is about the change in pension age.

62 really isn't old, so unless you're disabled or can't work for any other reason, I don't understand why, if you need money, you don't try to find yourself a job? Even part time, something that would just bring in a little income each week. You might actually even enjoy it.

Glammy57 is right.
The OP is asking for advice. Not our views on having children.

I am paying my taxes to help those less fortunate than myself.

Glammy I think having five children is a matter of concern to others - they consume a variety of resources including health and education , child benefit and prevent ( usually ) mothers from working and building up pension rights and savings. If you live in a society which collectively provides through taxation for some of the costs associated with bringing up children, then it is to do with those of us who work and pay our taxes to support those that have far more children than they need to .

Lily. Please don’t be sorry for posting - some of us have empathy. Nobody should judge you for having five children, it has nothing to do with anyone else.
I did mention Citizens Advice Bureau, previously. You should find that those working in the voluntary sector are non-judgemental and will do their utmost to advise you.
I hope your financial situation will improve. All the best! ??

10+ years younger of course I meant

Cherry none of us can help when we were born. I appreciate that I am not a WASPI woman but it’s not a one way ticket - women like you 10 + older than me benefited at a younger age from equal pay legislation, free and better contraception, sex discrimination legislation, abortion rights. I’m glad you did. I never ever thought that the unequal state pension age was acceptable and was pleased at the 1997 legislation for equalising ages. I’ve said before that it was the acceleration of theses changes and the lack of systematic notification that was wrong .

Well said Cherrytree59 -agree with all you've said, from a very disgruntled Waspi

Bang on all you like, Cherrytree, I think you speak for many of us.

And however savvy we may have been in our working lives, could any of us have guessed that when we opted out to better provide for our retirement, we would then find those years no longer counted towards our state pension?

You’re correct, Lilylavender. We should all have been issued with a crystal ball.

M0nica I cannot understand how you interpreted my post to say that I ever asked my DH for money
(Cut and pasted verbatim below)
I did not go back to work until the youngest started school, not that I had to ask for any money but I did feel I was buying DH’s birthday or Christmas present out of his money. Fortunately he did not see things that way as everything went into the joint account, but I also used to save my Family Allowance for little extras
I wrote precisely the contrary of what you seem to have read!

I like your thinking Floradora! It does your sons no favours to allow them to save up at your expense. How can they truly understand the importance of planning, budgeting and living according to their means while you artificially reduce their living costs?

The only person who should give you money is your DH . You are a couple and perhaps it is time to have a chat about your finances. If your sons are not paying their way either I would set down luncheon meat and one potato for their evening meal and say you cannot wash the clothes because you have no money to buy soap pwder.

Sorry to bang on but...
Like many others on GN, I was born in the late 50s and will not receive any state pension until at least 66yrs.

Some posters on the one hand have pointed out that 'we' were warned and should have made provision and/or be happy to work at least part time until eventually receiving the state pension.

Also pointing out that in a fair society both women and men should retire at the same age.

However on the other hand quite a few of those giving out such advice, were I presume more than happy to receive their state pension at 60, probably without one iota of worry that their 'Poor' husbands had to work an extra 5 years.

We are not talking peanuts here.
1950s women will be 40 to 50 thousand pounds poorer than the previous decade of women .

Had the goal posts not changed, the OP would be in receipt of her own state pension, just as other posters did when they turned 60.

Also as one poster on another thread mentioned, she was still working at 60 and was not in need of money, so chose defer the state pension for several years.

This would mean that future monthly payments would be considerably more, when eventually deciding to draw the pension.

Not an option for 60 year old waspi women.

In the US there are plenty of male judges in the courts that view husbands earnings as more than housewives contributions- Doesn't matter how much husbands incomes are- The way the see it, housewives earn "their keep" in exchange for the roof over their heads, food and so forth- 6 children? No matter- The husbands income is always valued as more-