sandyf

There were no such signs when I went out end of Sept, there was an IO looking at passports and directing people to counter or E-gate. No queue at E-gate and straight through. I had no problem on re-entry with re-entry permit at end of Oct. I use the Thai side on re-entry, only 2 counters now and when I came only one could be used by foreigners. One had a foreigner already at it so I went to the one not in use and told Thai only.

You are making the assumption that legislation cannot be infallible, if that was the case gay men would still go to prison. The government will only right the wrongs of the past if they are pushed into it, on frozen pensions there is very little pushing.

I did write to the veterans minister a few years back, Johnny Mercer at the time. I got a reply from his wife, his secretary, saying he would be looking into it but never got any response from him, even though he put his name to the APPG. As far as the government is concerned, if you want to live in certain jurisdictions, you are no longer thanked for your service. The discrimination became very obvious when this was said in 2019. "Work and Pensions Secretary Dr Thérèse Coffey said: Pensioners in Europe who have paid into the system for years deserve peace of mind over their future finances." Yes, GP and SERPS are added to state pension but also frozen, although being specified as pension schemes.

Indeed, I have just seen the thread. There is little doubt that getting the e-visa before travelling would have been best option. Under the circumstances your best bet now is to travel to Thailand visa exempt and deal with things there. I would suggest you go with your wife to her bank and say you want to open account in your name and want to transfer funds from her account into the new account for a Non O visa application, very unlikely there will be a problem. As suggested by immigration best to have residency certificate as they will want that for their records. It used to be quite easy to get account but now much more difficult, main thing is to approach bank in a sensible manner. Once you have the account you will need to convert your visa status from exempt to Non O for 90 days and then apply for a 12 month extension. Some offices will do both in one go, why you may hear some talk of a 15 month visa. Your understanding on entry to Thailand was perfectly correct but very unlikely that immigration would refuse entry just on the basis of no onward travel, they realise many will leave Thailand by land borders and that mode of transport cannot be used in visa applications. The bigger hurdle is checking in at the airport, some staff will follow the rules to the letter and may refuse boarding if no onward travel and no visa. This is why all the talk of low cost booking arrangement as an addition to your single ticket to Thailand. In 25 years I have found it to be very hit and miss on passport checks, better to be safe than sorry. Good luck.

Apologies, I recognised the name and thought that was what I had been given when I had the hearing problem but I still have some of the medication and when I looked it was actually Mometazone Furoate. I do have Betamethazone but that is a cream that I got for the scorpion sting. Sorry for the mix up. About 18 months ago I had skin cancer,BCC, removed from my ear and following the operation I couldn't hear properly in that ear. I was referred to the ENT and they did various tests including camera up the nose and a variety of nasal medications with mometazone being a metered spray, all to no avail. I was a bit concerned about flying back to the UK at the time but she said it wouldn't be a problem. It wasn't , I never went back to the ENT and just lived with the problem. About 4 months later I flew to Hanoi and as I came in to land there was gurgling noises in the ear and the problem disappeared, so much for doctors. I have never been to Pattaya City but have heard it is not very falang friendly, the one in Naklua may be a better bet. I live in Chonburi and use Bang Saen which I would recommend if you could handle the travelling. They built a brand new block and outpatients moved into there so all quite new and well organsied.

Indeed.Some have become fixated on the 2016 reforms that turned the state pension into a single tier arrangement. They seem to think the previous years also became a single tier arrangement under those reforms. Following the 1975 pension reforms the politicians had allowed themselves and a selct part of the population to take money that should have gone to the national insurance fund and put it into their own workplace pensions. I doubt it was coincidence that this came at a time the UK was experiencing the highest inflation rates in it's history. The arrangement quickly came to an end when investment returns became much lower, with the government issuing the COPE guarantee. Those that opted out of the government additional state pension scheme are now receiving their additional state pension as part of an NI enhanced workplace or private pension, which is effectively indexed linked worldwide and for some protected by the DTA. Your comment that you did quite well from SERPS is a bit speculative. The government has never revealed how much individuals paid into the additional pension schemes so no way of knowing how it compared to the returns of a private scheme. In 1988 when contracting out was widened to greater part of the population the government even started bribing people with taxpayers money to opt out the additional state pension scheme. Until 1988, people could only contract out if they were members of a defined benefit (DB) occupational pension scheme. In 1988, the government extended this to defined contribution (DC) or money purchase occupational schemes and personal pensions. For the first five years of the scheme, the government paid an extra 2% of your earnings into your personal pension. By 1992, more than 5 million people had left Serps for a personal pension. https://www.which.co.uk/money/pensions-and-retirement/state-pension/what-was-contracting-out-ascMg4t2I7Hk

The issue of VAT came up some time ago, about Easter I think and was supposed to be implemented on all postal packages from May. I get a package from India every 3 months through Thai Post and fully expected a charge on the August delivery, didn't happen. Didn't happen either on the one I received yesterday, may well a hit and miss affair depending on source or area where received. You are quite right about the contents, some prefer their interpretation but strikes me that personal use is not seen as importation, intention to sell may well be the criteria. I have been buying medication online for many years without a problem, the customs label has always been specific. There is also a copy of the prescription inside in case it gets opened, but never happened. The cost of medication can vary quite a bit. I used to use Fascino with discount card but then saved quite significantly when I started using the pharmacy at the government hospital. I have had the steroid nasal spray so it is available, but came from the hospital pharmacy.

Every year the politicians attend memorials or stand in parliament and express their eternal praise and gratitude for the armed forces. Every year those same politicians vote to deny some miltary veterans uprating on all the pension components of their state pension. Anyone who would attempt to ridicule the situation should be hanging their head in shame. https://www.change.org/p/prime-minister-meet-with-my-99-year-old-ww2-veteran-mum-fighting-to-end-frozen-pensions/u/33061322?cs_tk=A3pmQq8wR_hGDGIwS2cAAXicyyvNyQEABF8BvGRiNWI5YjZhYTAzZGI0NGY3NmU0ZmQwZjc3ODI3Y2NkMjczNWFhNzNmZTYyNTk1NmRmOTY1ZDUxNjFmMTBkOTg%3D&utm_campaign=b2ab8bc8671d4bc290ec5607dceb1bf6&utm_content=initial_v0_9_0&utm_medium=email&utm_source=petition_update&utm_term=cs

The forms are US orientated, W-8 & W-9 have been around for a long time, I am from UK and can remember having to submit them over 20 years ago. Think the IRS wanted info on any funds held in the US. FATCA is also to do with the US citizens and been around a long time, now that CRS is about it is probably an update to the name of the FATCA form. Best to wait for something HMRC related.

Your link was from 2016 and far from credible. The government wants people to believe the "state pension" is a single entity and you have fallen for it. It may come as a suprprise to you but the injustice from previous years has not been wiped out by the changes in 2016. Those that contracted out get the proceeds from their second state pension NI contributions paid out as part of an occupational or private pension, index linked world wide. They do not want to acknowledge the discrimination that was perpretrated by that arrangement. Everyone is perfectly free to support the discrimination, but the hypocrisy lies in denying it.

Because you jumped in without any consideration to what was said.

You can dig up anything you want, at the end of the day "state pension" is a generic term and has to be defined in context. The ignorance make me think you participated in the fraudulent contracting out arrangement.

Indeed. In 1961 the term "State Pension" ceased to be a valid reference for the OAP. it became an umbrella term for payments that would be received at state pension age. Government statements on the frozen pension issue always refer to the state pension when they actually mean the basic component rather than the pension as a whole. This is a deliberate falsehood and many that are ignorant of the state pension structure go along with it. My state pension is made up of several components and quite obviously calculated on an individual basis. the letter that came with it even said so. It should be noted that the bottom component was based on contributions to the GRB scheme rather than NI.

You know what they say about sarcasm and obviously your wearing the cap.

That same singulat rhetoric. Why are some unprepared to accept that politicians have a vested interest in protecting their mismanagement of the legislation. Only the ignorant would think that the law has always been right. Your quote The State Pension is described in legislation as a “benefit” in order to root it within the existing social security framework as a statutory scheme paid out of monies in the National Insurance Fund. Despite what the quote may say, there is no statutory amount for the state pension and the Graduated Pension Scheme never had anything to do with National Insurance. The political rhetoric is false by omission and deliberately misleading, effectively Fraud by False Representation.

Indeed, but wouldn't that include legalised fraud perpretrated by the government. Like many others, ignorance leads to a fixation on the state pension being a single entity. "You are now making excuses," - what excuses you claim "state pensions" are a benefit yet the govenment describes them as "pension schemes" Who on earth should one believe?

The first reciprocal agreement was a blatant act of discrimation. Of course you are free to believe that it didn't create 2 classes of overseas pensioner, those that could and those that couldn't.

You are distorting that word "benefit" again, the term SERPS stands for State Earnings Related Pension Scheme. You are also missing the point. The first reciprocal agreement was an act of discrimination, creating 2 classes of overseas pensioner, those that can and those that can't. "that's why they can tell us" - what the govenment say is not always right. In light of current equality laws the government has been forced to address other discriminatory issues, why not the state pension. They claim it has been that way for over 70 years but GRB only started in 1961. Graduated Retirement Benefit (GRB) GRB was an early form of earnings-related pension, intended to top-up basic pension. It is based on graduated contributions paid on earnings between 1961 and 1975 and is paid to those people who paid into the graduated pension scheme. The entitlement is based on each unit of graduated contributions paid. Essentially every £7.50 contributed by a man, and every £9.00 contributed by a woman bought one unit. It will be paid when you claim your Basic State Pension, but can also be paid at State Pension Age even if you do not qualify for a Basic Pension. You can delay claiming it and earn increments in the same way as for other parts of the pension. A widow, widower or surviving civil partner can get half of any Graduated Retirement Benefit for which their spouse had qualified. Amounts of Graduated Retirement Benefit are generally very small and often paid as a lump-sum rather than weekly payments. https://www.rights4seniors.net/content/other-state-pension-payments

So you think that discrimination is selective, some should be addressed and some not. This thread is due to discrimination, and will continue until people like you open their eyes and see the discrimination that has been perpretrated by the government over the years.

The word "benefit" is arbitrary and needs a qualifying adjective for context. The government wants to push the view that the state pension is a social security benefit. Sometime after it's introduction the state pension came under the umbrella of the Social Security Act along with moves to break the link between NI and the state pension, leading to false claims by the government. The government publishes the rates for welfare benefits but there is no rate for the "state pension", it is an individual entitlement.

Friend of mine pops across into Laos for the day to do some shopping,where do you think he stays. A couple of years ago I went into Malaysia on the morning Hat Yai shuttle and came back on the afternoon one. About 4 hours in Malaysia but feel free to call it staying there if you want.

Why do some feel compelled to deviate from the point being made. When it all started there were no pensions paid overseas so there was no frozen aspect. When reciprocal arrangements were introduced it was pure discrimination but at that point in time the government gave no consideration to discrimination. Gay men were being put in prison, terms like "nixxers" and "quxxrs" were in common use and Robertsons had a "Goxxy" on the jam, pension discrimination never got a second thought. Other issues have been addressed over time but he government only bows to domestic public opinion, mention "trans" and they all jump, unfortunately the very nature of the frozen pension issue it is a case of out of sight, out of mind.

Not worded correctly, you mean staying for more than 90 consecutive days. Some leave the country regularly so may not be required for a significant length of time.

No, you paid for the pensioners at the time. Not for your own pensions. Indeed, the UK state pension introduced in 1948 as a "Pay as you go" pension scheme, where the workers of today pay the pensioners of today and the workers of tomorrow pay the pensioners of tomorrow. The scheme was to be funded by national insurance contributions with a percentage of that contribution going towards the health service. In a response to a petition in the House last year the following statement was made. "An individual’s contributions provide a foundation for calculating entitlement to future personal entitlements. The contributions do not actually pay for those entitlements directly. Twenty per cent. of national insurance contributions go towards the national health service, the remainder fund contributory benefits, the vast majority of which goes to the state pension. National insurance contributions are pooled and people do not have an individual pot which funds their own state pension." https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-02-19/debates/24021975000085/FrozenBritishPensions In order to defend the government position Mr Maynard referred to the circumstances of the day rather than as they were in 1948, when there were no other benefits being paid from NI. The government had deliberately distorted the NI arrangement in an attempt to remove the link between NI and the state pension. The long term aim has always been to merge NI into general taxation. The above statement is intended to deceive and as politicians have a vested interest in keeping the lid on, nothing was said. People have an NI record and as such have a "holding" in the national insurance fund, a bit like any other pension. It should be remembered it was the introduction of other benefits from NI that resulted in a shortfall from NI with the state pension being partially funded by income tax. The rhetoric above is similar to flawed assessment made by the court in the Carson case, which hinged on the link between NI and state pension.

No it hasn't. If the frozen aspect had been "that way" for over 70 years then all state pensions would be frozen. You can try and defend discrimination as much as you want, doesn't make it right. There were other discriminatory policies introduced over the years which you obviously fail to comprehend.