sambum

Probably American - and should have gone more often!

You missed a bit "And all the DLT inspectors' bank accounts!

"I'd struggle to get by on £86,000 p.a. in London." Then how do you feel about pensioners on app £12000 p.a. having their Winter fuel Allowance stopped by the Government that says "all pensioners, ALL pensioners will be better off under Labour"?

No I am not moving the goalposts - merely showing examples of if there is a "will" (or want) to change something that has been in place for many years - it can be changed. For instance, if there was a "will" in the Government to pay all pensioners their annual increments regardless of where they live, they would do it - the cost is minor compared to what it costs to look after illegal immigrants, and what we give in Foreign Aid (Sorry, off topic again! ) P.S. A very subtle signature to your post - I hope it catches on! 🙂

Couldn't agree more, and not let's forget the £16,000 worth of free clothes that Starmer got, or that his Finance Minister finds it a struggle to get by on £86,000 p.a. (plus expenses) or that his Assistant gets paid more than he does (£170,000 p.a. plus expenses - £3000 more than the PM) And then he tells us, after taking £300 Winter Fuel Allowance off most pensioners, that "every pensioner, EVERY pensioner will be better off under Labour"!!! I can't say what I really think, or I'd be banned, but suffice it to say that the man "talks a bad talk," and he and his party have only been in power 3 months, and already they all seem to be feathering their nests a trifle early in their governance.

My post:- "If he lives in the Phillippines he is entitled to the annual increases/increments." Your post:- Wrong my friend if he lives in the Philippines it is not frozen . I am CONFUSED!!! You are saying if he lives in the Phillippines, his pension is not frozen, and I am saying that if he lives in the Phillippines, he gets the annual increments (i.e. not frozen) and you are telling me that I am wrong? An apology would be acceptable! 🙂

Out of all the people I know that have retired to Thailand and not declared it to the UK Gov't (and that includes a couple of ex Gov't employees) only one couple have been "found out"/ were "grassed up", and they had to go back to the UK for a tribunal. They were told by the tribunal that they were liable to pay back all the increments they had received since retiring to Thailand - no mention of "jail time" - but when the "chair" of the tribunal found out that the man had served his country in the RAF for a few years, he said "Oh, really - that changes things" (Or words to that effect because I wasn't actually there), and all "charges" were dropped - but they didn't get any more increments!

What part of IS do you not understand?

Maybe he hasn't claimed it, or there is some other underlying reason, but under normal circumstances, he would i.e. - from the British Government website:- "If you live in one of the following countries and receive a UK State Pension, you will usually get an increase in your pension every year: Barbados Bermuda Bosnia-Herzegovina Gibraltar Guernsey the Isle of Man Israel Jamaica Jersey Kosovo Mauritius Montenegro North Macedonia the Philippines Serbia Turkey USA The UK has social security agreements with Canada and New Zealand, but you cannot get a yearly increase in your UK State Pension if you live in either of those countries." (And I do note that it says "usually"!)

"He didn't have his pension frozen." He had his pension frozen at the amount that it was when he first moved away from the UK - depends how you read it!

No, it was to stop paying the Old Age Winter Fuel Allowance to all pensioners.

Maybe they didn't? Unlike immigrants who are helped every step of the way - they even have people advising them about what they can claim for and what they can't, while the UK pensioners who have lived and worked all their lives in the UK have to find out for themselves - or plough through a pile of gobbledygook to find out what applies to them and what doesn't!

Don't tell them you moved to Thailand! "Say nowt!"

If he lives in the Phillippines he is entitled to the annual increases/increments.

"Its been like that since the 1950's in certain countries. Whether we think its right or wrong is immaterial" Not at all - anything can be subject to change if the will is there! How many years did it take to persuade the country to give women the vote? How many years before abortion was legalised? How many yeras before homosexuality was legalised?

Yes he does!

This is a situation that has been ongoing for years, through different Governments, and in spite of various petitions, letters to MP's, even brought up in the Court of Human Rights, the situation has not changed. As ridiculous as it may seem, one can live on the American side of the Niagara Falls and get the annual increments, but live on the Canadian side and not get them! One can live in the Philippines and get the increments, but not in Thailand - it's all down to a "reciprocal agreement", as mentioned in the article. It is a grossly unfair situation, and MP's, of both parties, have over the years made promises in their pre election manifestos to "bring it up in the House", but to date the situation has changed not a jot from where we were at years ago. It seems that successive British Governments are more interested in providing shelter and accommodation to illegal immigrants than they are in looking after their own pensioners that have made contributions to the system all their working lives. The cost to the UK taxpayer by paying the increments to their own people would cost a few million pounds, compared to the cost to the country of housing these people who have contributed NOTHING at all to the British economy. By all means, give them basic shelter and accommodation, but not 5 Star Hotel treatment at the expense of people who have lived and spent all their working lives there! "PENSIONERS FIRST"!!!!! A big fuss is being made at the moment about many pensioners in the UK losing their Old Age Winter Fuel Allowance. I lost mine years ago when I moved to Thailand, but I think that is fair, as we don't see freezing Winters in Thailand. What is not fair is the freezing of State Pensions, depending on where you live. What should it matter? I get a small Works Pension from my previous employer, but they give me a small increase every year - they are not concerned where I live! One of the reasons given by Government (apart from the "reciprocal agreement") for the freezing is that UK pensioners should be contributing to the UK economy by spending their pensions in the UK. I suppose pensioners in the Phillippines or the USA fly back to the UK every month to spend their pensions there? At the end of the day, the Government of the day needs to WANT to help their own pensioners, and unfortunately, we seem to come low down on their list of priorities, in spite of the current PM's assertions that "every pensioner, EVERY pensioner will be better off with Labour". OK, let him prove it by treating EVERY pensioner the same way by unfreezing the pensions of EVERY pensioner that is affected by this outdated and unfair piece of legislation.

I expected someone to come up with that one! 🙄

And cancel your "AA" subscription!!! You'd be a happier person!

Another one who just reads the headlines! I'm doing your job for you - just under the second picture:- "Phuket Airport officials confirmed that the inebriated tourist was detained in an airport cell to sober up, causing him to miss his flight and rebook another, Happy now?

Apparently, according to another source of news, during the seven-day holiday of "Golden Week", TAT forecasts a total of 132,000-183,000 Chinese arrivals, generating 3.7-5.1 billion baht, up from 2.3 billion baht recorded in last year's Golden Week." And I thought that the Chinese were experiencing a decline in finances!

"Travelling is a privilege, not a right." No, it's not a privilege - it is a form of transportation which has been paid for by the individual concerned. I just hope that he has to pay the same amount - or more for the replacement flight as he missed the original one.

Which is apparently what he did! :- "Phuket Airport officials confirmed that the inebriated tourist was detained in an airport cell to sober up, causing him to miss his flight and rebook another, reported the Daily Mail."

Apparently the days of virtually limitless amounts of booze on a plane are long gone!

Taking over from "Brits Behaving Badly"?