Rise in Pension Age

I was contracted out for a good many years on the advice of my private pension provider, Equitable Life. I receive the old sp and it’s reduced due to the years of being contracted out. Maybe it’s different for teachers who were contracted out?

Ouch maddyone! I'm afraid you are one of a small group who drew the short straw. Your pension age was delayed, but you're still on the old scheme. I was trying to work out when you reached state pension age. Everybody who reached it after April 2016 is on the new scheme, but you just missed out. That does, however, mean that your pension is not affected by contracted out years. If you're not receiving your full entitlement, it must be because you have missing years or there's been a mistake. Have you checked your contributions record on the Government Gateway?

I did opt out of contracting out for some years maddyone and it was one of the biggest mistakes of my life. I would receive a little less state pension now, but my occupational pension would be about £6-7k a year more. At the time, I didn't think I would stay being a teacher for so long and I was given some very bad advice, but I really should have known better.

No problem, the biggest thing is that WASPI women have all lost out, and for some it has been devastating.
The government said that the ‘new’ state pension would have winners and losers. I know plenty of losers, not sure about winners though.
What annoys me about contracting out * growstuff* is that I was never asked, it was never explained, it just happened. Had I been given a choice to pay more NI contributions rather than a lowered amount (I don’t think it was very much lowered as I paid rather a lot of NI but I may be wrong) I might well have chosen to pay the higher amount. As it was, I found out that I had been contracted out and the full implications of that not too long before I actually retired. Coupled with being a WASPI woman, like most of us on here, and my birthdate being exactly three weeks prior to the changeover date to the new pension, I feel a bit aggrieved. However, I’m fully aware that I’m in a much better position than many other women through the fact that I have a professional pension.

maddyone

I’ve never worked in France growstuff, maybe you’re mixing me up with someone else.

Ooops! Sorry! Senior moment!

The fact remains that the old state pension wasn't affected by contracting out. The new rules were sneaked in when the new pension was introduced. At the time, I sat down and spent hours working it all out. I lost a bit, but I also lost the SERPs I'd built up when working for employers without a pension scheme.

I’ve never worked in France growstuff, maybe you’re mixing me up with someone else.

J52

growstuff

maddyone I'm a bit confused. I think you will receive the new state pension. I already receive mine. I always thought you were a little younger than I am. Contracting out didn't affect the old state pension.

Yes it did, certain employees including teachers were given no choice in the matter.

No, it didn't. Contracting out meant that teachers (and others) paid less in NICs, but state pension wasn't affected and depended on the number of contribution years. That changed when the new state pension was introduced and those who contracted out receive a slightly reduced state pension.

Both you and your husband won't receive SERPS (additional state pension), which could be what you mean by losing out as a result of contracting out, but you didn't pay for it and occupational pensions are more generous.

That's not correct maddyone. Contracting out didn't affect the old pension. It could be that you're missing some qualifying years from the time you worked in France. I honestly don't know, without looking at your contribution record (which I don't want to do).

There are some winners, by the way.

No, I’m a bit older than you growstuff. I was seventy in March 🫢 however did that happen? I definitely receive the old pension, had my birthday been a few weeks later, after 6th April, I would have been on the new pension, which is about ten or twelve pounds a week more. I was contacted out so also receive a lower pension because of that apparently. My husband contacted out too and receives a lower pension for that reason, although he gets the extra 10/12 pounds a week due to his receiving his pension after the new pension came in. He’s older than me by a year, but got his pension on his 65th birthday which wasn’t till after the date of change over. It’s really complicated isn’t it? I’m a WASPI woman and so I received my state pension when I was 63 as I was on the sliding scale. Another friend is two years younger than me and had to wait till 66. Lots of losers, but no winners in this fiasco. I’m just thankful that my husband and myself have both got professional pensions.

growstuff

maddyone I'm a bit confused. I think you will receive the new state pension. I already receive mine. I always thought you were a little younger than I am. Contracting out didn't affect the old state pension.

Yes it did, certain employees including teachers were given no choice in the matter.

Contracting out did affect the old sp. I receive the old one but less than the full amount due to having been contracted out.

maddyone I'm a bit confused. I think you will receive the new state pension. I already receive mine. I always thought you were a little younger than I am. Contracting out didn't affect the old state pension.

Brilliant growstuff.
I also missed out because my birth date left me three weeks short of getting the new pension, whilst my friend gets it despite being in the same school year, because she was born three months after me. This leaves me about £10-£12 a week less well off but at least you should get that growstuff because I think you’re about 1-2 years younger than I am. As teachers we both contracted out (was never given a choice about that) and therefore still receive somewhat less than the full state pension. Thank goodness for our professional pensions.

... and younger.

For once I agree with you maddyone.

Doodledog

I've just asked Mr Dog (who is not a pensions expert, but who deals with his 97 year old mum's affairs) and he says that his parents used to get a couple's pension when his father was alive. Basically, it is as I thought - the pension was paid to the man but he got an element of it for his wife. It was a sexist system, but regardless, it amounted to a pension for a non-working wife even though it wasn't paid directly to her. I remember women of my grandmother's generation getting pensions whether they had worked or not, and getting them at 60. I don't know what happened in couples where the man was pension age and the woman still working - that was probably quite rare, particularly with the differential in the pension age then.

Since Mr Dog Senior died, my MIL gets a state pension based on her late husband's contributions, as well as his inherited occupational ones. People don't inherit state pensions now, but those on the old schemes did, and still do.

I’m not a pensions expert either, but you’re right Doodledog in that the husbands of women who didn’t work, or those who paid married woman’s stamp, received a married couple’s pension but the wife was paid her part of the pension straight to herself. My mother worked for many years but only paid a married woman’s stamp and consequently she received a pension (it was about £60 per week) from her 60th birthday. Likewise my mother in law. Likewise my sister, although she never worked at all. When my father died my mother received the pension he would have received as a single person and was considerably more than the roughly £60/£65 she was getting. In fact she received considerably more than I do for my state pension even though I contributed the required number of years and paid a full stamp. These women did not do badly, they did well, because they never paid a full stamp, or even paid nothing at all as they didn’t work. The women who have missed out are much younger women, who paid a full stamp because they are being made to wait much longer for the pensions they have paid for. These women were primarily born in the fifties.

Doodledog

I've just asked Mr Dog (who is not a pensions expert, but who deals with his 97 year old mum's affairs) and he says that his parents used to get a couple's pension when his father was alive. Basically, it is as I thought - the pension was paid to the man but he got an element of it for his wife. It was a sexist system, but regardless, it amounted to a pension for a non-working wife even though it wasn't paid directly to her. I remember women of my grandmother's generation getting pensions whether they had worked or not, and getting them at 60. I don't know what happened in couples where the man was pension age and the woman still working - that was probably quite rare, particularly with the differential in the pension age then.

Since Mr Dog Senior died, my MIL gets a state pension based on her late husband's contributions, as well as his inherited occupational ones. People don't inherit state pensions now, but those on the old schemes did, and still do.

My SisIL worked for most of her life until she retired at 60. Unfortunately, she was also one of those women who were told, unfortunately, that they would get their pension based on their husband's contributions so she paid a Married Woman's Stamp as, having children, every penny counted in those days. Therefore she didn't get a full pension in her own right.
Her one firm's pension scheme was non-existent, another one failed before the compensation scheme came in.

I don't trust what David Hencke writes about the National Insurance fund and WASPI women. I believe he was paid by WASPI at one stage to write for them.

The NI fund has never been ring-fenced for pensions. NICs and taxes all get lumped together and the bills are paid. There have been times when the amount allocated for pensions hasn't been enough and vice versa. The 2011 changes to women's pension ages were never to do with saving money. If women live to the average age expectancy, they'll receive the same - and more, of course, if they live longer.

Nevertheless, I agree with Chardy. Performance at work does decline for many as they get older and I just don't think it's right that people should have to do paid work until they drop. People in low paid jobs are more likely to be exhausted and to die earlier, so are the ones who would be most affected by a further rise in the SP age. As I've already pointed out, younger people are already paying considerably more in NICs and deserve better. One way or the other, money needs to be found to maintain the current SP age.

If the government really feels it needs to raise money, it could abolish the higher rate tax exemptions on pension contributions for high earners and/or charge pensioners a means-tested health tax.

growstuff

I don't think it's reasonable to raise the pension age beyond what it is now. It won't affect me because I already receive my pension. I was also one of the lucky ones who received occupational pensions at 60, so I could afford to cut down my hours.

However, I've just turned 68 and I know very well that I wouldn't be able to work full-time and work at the same level as I used to do. Chronic illnesses have caught up with me and I just don't have the energy to work 60 hours a week in a stressful job.

It might suit some people, but the majority of people have some form of chronic illness by the time they reach their mid 60s. Younger people pay much higher NI contributions than any of us did. Some lower paid people even pay more in NICs than they do in income tax (and tend to die earlier). NICs and income tax ultimately go into the same "pot" (which isn't a pot anyway) and I don't believe that it's unaffordable for the current pension age to be maintained.

The lady, waiting for dr surgery to open at 8am this morning, said to me 'It's no fun getting old'. I replied 'There are things my mother and grandmother should have told me'.
Physical jobs, emotionally-demanding jobs, jobs that require organisation, multi-tasking, concentration - all of the above are tough after 60 (55?), almost impossible after 65.

Other countries have a better state pension, at a younger age. UK govt needs to think beyond the next election.

Remember "successive governments had taken a decision NOT to top up the fund as originally proposed by William Beveridge when the welfare state was set up in 1948." thus saving £271bn
davidhencke.com/2018/07/19/revealed-the-271-billion-rape-of-the-national-insurance-fund-that-deprived-50s-women-of-their-state-pension/

I'm not sure what happens with your French pension - it might be worth enquiring.
Yes, thanks. My understanding is that you need to have paid 10 years of working contributions to qualify for any state pension. I have 7.5 years.

I'm here at the moment and I did think about joining a manifestation group to see if they would help me!! (But I'm a bit nervous about the French police, so I'll stay put in the garden).

Doodledog

I've just asked Mr Dog (who is not a pensions expert, but who deals with his 97 year old mum's affairs) and he says that his parents used to get a couple's pension when his father was alive. Basically, it is as I thought - the pension was paid to the man but he got an element of it for his wife. It was a sexist system, but regardless, it amounted to a pension for a non-working wife even though it wasn't paid directly to her. I remember women of my grandmother's generation getting pensions whether they had worked or not, and getting them at 60. I don't know what happened in couples where the man was pension age and the woman still working - that was probably quite rare, particularly with the differential in the pension age then.

Since Mr Dog Senior died, my MIL gets a state pension based on her late husband's contributions, as well as his inherited occupational ones. People don't inherit state pensions now, but those on the old schemes did, and still do.

I think (but you'd need to check) that a woman born before a certain year (not sure when exactly) is entitled to a pension of 60% of the full amount based on her husband's contributions BUT she needs to have paid at least one year of "married woman" stamp. This no longer applies since the 2016 changes.

The Married Woman's stamp was abolished in 1977 but, shockingly, those paying it were not informed and were allowed to continue paying it, therefore missing out on years of contributions.

That was the year we got married, I was 20.

The lady who worked the wages out for our team said the older members of staff wouldn't gain sufficiently by paying the full stamp to make it worth their while.

However she was most insistent that myself and the other young girl needed to pay the extra, which we felt annoyed about at the time, and said we'd thank her for it later.

I get my own full state pension this year, so yes, thank you Gill 👍

Some of us, working for a LHA, were told we had to sign to this, therefore missing out on several years worth of full contributions before we were told we should not have been made to do this as routine.
That's bad. We're you not able to pay the shortfall plus compound interest to get the full amount?

I don't think it's reasonable to raise the pension age beyond what it is now. It won't affect me because I already receive my pension. I was also one of the lucky ones who received occupational pensions at 60, so I could afford to cut down my hours.

However, I've just turned 68 and I know very well that I wouldn't be able to work full-time and work at the same level as I used to do. Chronic illnesses have caught up with me and I just don't have the energy to work 60 hours a week in a stressful job.

It might suit some people, but the majority of people have some form of chronic illness by the time they reach their mid 60s. Younger people pay much higher NI contributions than any of us did. Some lower paid people even pay more in NICs than they do in income tax (and tend to die earlier). NICs and income tax ultimately go into the same "pot" (which isn't a pot anyway) and I don't believe that it's unaffordable for the current pension age to be maintained.

Doodledog

Wasn't women's pension rolled up into their husbands'? The ads for pension credit talk in terms of £X for a single claimant and £Y for a couple. I may be wrong, but that suggests that married women do get pensions under the old system, but that it is paid with their husbands', unless they have contributed in their own right.

I believe women my age had to either work or there was some provision for a voluntary stamp. I did neither.