2 minutes ago, transam said:

All that is peanuts, if all us expats went to a country on their list, we would all get paid an up to date pension.......... Fact.....🤗

It is also probably 'peanuts' compared to the other money they waste without our knowledge.

3 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

What - and make yourself an illegal immigrant???!!!

 

PH

Not at all.  It is entirely possible to leave and enter the UK without needing to go though Passport Control.  A person born in the UK of British parents can never be an illegal immigrant.

18 minutes ago, transam said:

Well, every Gov. of every persuasion has been the same, so I don't think a fiddle, it is their common ground........🤗

Yes well they need it........they have to fund the ridiculous amounts of taxpayer's money they waste - often without any benefit to or with the knowledge of those taxpayers.

A couple of examples:

The Rwanda relocation scheme is reported to have cost £500 million so far and is not yet actually working and its unlikely to too.

Lesser known: Boris Johnson spent £53 million on his 'Garden Bridge' scheme. The bridge was never built. That figure included £161,000 on a website and £470,000 on a Gala Dinner to announce the scheme. £43 million of that came from the taxpayers - its unclear where the other £10 miillion came from.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47228698

That's just 2 examples, there will be thousands. They should be made to publicise every major spend they make.

You could say that we vote for these people but how many of them include these things in their Manifesto's?

Just now, transam said:

I find it amusing how those here on the fiddle have it all worked out, they have the answers, noooo ploblems.............................🤭

Its the UK government that are on the fiddle.

11 minutes ago, sandyf said:

That is not a fact, you are way off track.

The fact is that the average working bloke of today will only receive a post 2016 state pension which may or may not be adjusted due to "Contracting Out".

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has received a Full State pension. Full State pensions are adjusted to individual circumstances based on the pre 2016 basic pension or based on the new state pension.

 

Pension credit has absolutely nothing to do with pensions, I was on pension credit before I reached retirement age. The government has a vested interest in keeping pensions low and creating a benefits dependent society.

There is nothing new, years ago companies gave workers luncheon vouchers which turned into a form of currency.  Won't be long before you see social security food vouchers being traded with pensioners not far behind.

I am not way off track at all - you fail to realise just how many people are only entitled to a basic pension.

If you have been receiving Pension Credit before your pension age, then you'd better be expecting a letter shortly requesting repayment.  Pension credit is there to top up the pensions of those who for whatever reason do not have enough contributions to enable them to get a full pension.  It is therefore - EVERYTHING to do with pensions. You should get your facts straight:

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/money-legal/benefits-entitlements/pension-credit/

https://www.gov.uk/pension-credit/eligibility

I suspect that you have actually been receiving Universal Credit.

Everyone has received a Full State Pension have they?  Well then perhaps you can tell me why my sister has just been notified that she will be only be getting £539.68 every 4 weeks from June when she retires because she doesn't have enough contribuitions?

3 minutes ago, VBF said:

The fact that you rent the apartment out on a long term basis pretty much shows that you do not live there.

If there is both a rental agreement and you then state it as your address might raise interest and cause an enquiry. That might also raise interest from HMRC as to your exact status and tax liabilities.

I have no idea whether either of those scenarios is likely but would tread carefully it it was me.

 

As for the "back door",  I tend to agree with @Mike Teavee comments above.

All that was taken care of a long time ago. My tenant does not have a current agreement.  That apartment has always been an 'insurance policy' for me and if I was staying in the UK, I would be moving there when I retire.

Think of it like this - I currently live in a tourist area of the UK and a couple of weeks ago I spoke to a couple who were in a camper van in a local car park.  We get literally hundreds of them every year and their season seems to get longer and longer.  This couple told me that since they retired, they've spent every year travelling around the entire UK with a few visits to Europe.

Provided they didn't have access to my passport details, how would anyone know my whereabouts and that I was any different to the couple I mention above?

Travel and passport details can be shared between countries but as far as I know, other that names on 'arrest lists' cropping up or a court request, there is no routine sharing of travel details in that way. 

The main thing here is not to raise any suspicions in the first place - therefore not triggering any more detailed investigations.  I very much doubt that HMRC simply go though pensioner's details randomly and think..........hmm let's check if that pesky pensioner is really living in the UK.  You would need to do something to raise that suspicion in the first place.

You might not be aware but HMRC are having serious staffing problems at the moment -as has been reported in the national news.  I don't think their main attention is focused on pensioners.

5 minutes ago, VBF said:

There's far more to what you just wrote mainly regarding the personalities of those involved, to whom is a duty of care applicable, who is responsible for the caretaking of the guns etc etc..... 

However, I'm comfortable in my opinion, so are you in yours, there are facts and statistics that support both of us so this argument is going nowhere.

We'll have to agree to differ.

Agreed although we have moved off topic - which is about the police carrying guns.  I'd rather not see an increase in the number of armed police officers in the UK but I'd have to accept that there is a growing case for that as more and more criminals seem to routinely carry guns.

13 minutes ago, Mike Teavee said:

I'm not sure how you would leave the UK by the "Back Door" but even if you could, do you really want to rely on that "Door" still being there & the same tenant staying in your apartment for the 10, 20+ years of retirement? 

That door is not likely to move - I'm not going to advertise it but its regularly used by tax exiles etc.  Neither is it illegal or does it require any subtifuge. Most that need it, know where it is and how to use it.

I don't rely on my tenant staying there but she's been there a long time already and I see no reason why that should change.  I don't though, think it will be difficult to find another similar tenant should she wish to leave.  There are other options too.

2 hours ago, dpeti73 said:

when i ask the immigration for non-o single what is give 90days stay, they give only 7 days extension it was last november.

Not necessarily in your case but there is often some confusion on these threads regarding extensions.

Most entries - either exempt or by visa can be extended by varying amounts.  Those who are married usually (always?) get longer.

Those extensions are entirely different to someone who applies for a 12 month extension of their stay based on marriage/family or retirement. That is a once a year extension and is used to effectively live in Thailand.

40 minutes ago, VBF said:

The government case would be that he had to prove it WAS permanent. 

For example... Takes a long-term lease on a property or sets up financial arrangements that only a resident would need.

I think they would find it difficult to prove otherwise. Anyone who knows about this as I now do, shouldn't find it too difficult to provide such evidence.

I for example, have an apartment in the UK that I rent out.  The girl who rents that apartment has been there for years and I know her very well - she loves it and doesn't want to move. I'm pretty sure she'll agree to facilitate what I need so when I move to Thailand, that will become my address and it will be me that pays the council tax.  I will also make sure that I use my UK bank account regularly and leave and enter the UK by the back door when I return to visit family etc.

I would prefer not to do any of that really but it seems I will be forced to if I want my pension increases.

10 hours ago, VBF said:

That may be the case, but if one made a short visit to UK and couldn't prove that the intention to return was permanent then one may not keep the increase. Tbh, I cannot find any law on this, as you say, "legal definition of 'permanent' "

And just how would it be proved that the intention was not permanent? One guy I know did actually return to the UK and not in order to receive his pension increases.  He lasted 4 months - until the November fog made him realise he was better off in Thailand.

6 hours ago, VBF said:

And here, even though I'm British, I shall quote the NRA and say "Guns don't kill people. People kill people"

And the death rate from guns is?

4 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

If you plan to live in another country, it would be wise to do some research and not "expect" things. 

Why would anyone think their pension would be treated differently simply because they choose to live their retirement years in warmer climes?

11 hours ago, webfact said:

and a strong southwesterly wind blowing at speeds of 5-15 km/hr. 

Strong?  That's a gentle breeze!

On 4/27/2024 at 9:25 AM, malct said:

I know its a long shot, But is it possible to get a taxi from Taxi from Suvarnabhumi Airport  to Yasothon and if so, Do you have any details  on who to get , I know its a long drive and it will be expensive, But with the way that Thai smile charges for extra baggage and then waiting for a flight to Ubon Ratchatani  then getting transport to Yasothon, it maybe better to pay a taxi driver . Maybe many won't be keen because it would be hard to get a return fare, Another possibility is to get a taxi to Buriram and then get a local taxi to take us to Yasothon .

 

Tank you for any advice  

I have a regular taxi guy that takes me from Suvarnabhumi to Khao Yai.  I'm pretty sure he'd be interested in taking you to Yasothon but its a hell of a drive - I've often done it.  Much better to get a flight to Ubon and rent a car/take a taxi from there.

If you still want a taxi from Bangkok to Yasothon - PM me.

1 hour ago, Upnotover said:

There is no fee. I do it frequently as no K-bank machine near me.

Are you sure there is no fee for withdrawing outside your branch's area - as there are with card withdrawals?

Where have I heard this before?

Not sure which other countries have State Pension Schemes - it would be interesting to hear from those who's countries do have them - as to whether they can receive their full pension if they move abroad.

A couple of years ago the UK government said they were planning to reform the pension system and just give everyone the same amount (that would not prevent any private enhancements).  There would be some people who would have been upset by such a proposal as those who have lived 'on the grey' and never paid in any contributions would get pensions.  However, under UK law, they would have to be given money to live on whether they'd paid in or not.

That proposal seemed far more sensible to me as all these schemes/benefits must cost a fortune to deliver.

Quite what happend to that proposal I know not but I haven't heard anything about it since.  Perhaps they realised that giving everyone the same amount would most likley involve cancelling the Frozen Pensions Policy. No government likes backing down - especially the current Tory Nationalist lot.

26 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Fairly obvious you are not fully aware of how the state pension evolved. You refer to basic an Full as though they are different versions of the same thing, the reality is there are pre 2016 pensions and post 2016 pensions. You are using the rhetoric the government wants to promote, helps the argument that pensions have risen.

What is called the basic state pension is only a component of the pre 2016 pension. My state pension is made up from 5 components, the earliest additional component is Graduated Pensions, something that many will never have heard of.

1975 brought about a revolution in the pension system with the introduction of SERPS, what people receive as a state pension revolves around their working life since 1975. There is little doubt that those that gained the most were those in an occupational pension at the time. They became contracted out with part of their NI contribution going into the occupational pension. Individuals like myself weren't allowed to contract out until 1989 and by the time I became eligible it was too late. The pre 2016 state pension can be one of 3 scenarios, Fully contracted out -  the basic state pension with possibly some Graduated pensions, No contracting out - the total of all pension components that existed during your working life, or a mixture of the 2. It is a complicated calculalation based on a split NI arrangement and there was never any government indication on how it was done. Those that contracted out had the same amount of NI taken from their wages but part went to the government and part into therir private pension. Those of us that gave all of it to the government under their legislation are now paying the penalty under different legislation from the same government.

The directors of a private pension scheme would have been locked up.

Fair enough, I am aware that pensions used to be a lot more complicated than they are now - superannuation ect. However, its still a fact that your average working bloke today will either receive a Basic State pension or Full State Pension and therefore will not be liable for any tax.

Those on Basic State Pension (subject to savings limits etc.) can have that topped up through Pension Credit - I believe that top up brings their pension to Full State Pension level.  Pension Credit is a means tested benefit and cannot be claimed by those living abroad. In fact there are rules that state the claimant can't spend more than four weeks per year outside the UK.  I have no problem with that - its a means tested benefit that is there to reflect the cost of living in the UK.

19 hours ago, VBF said:

Then you presumably didn't stay in UK for the minimum required 6 months

See  https://aseannow.com/topic/1325999-frozen-pension-policy-turns-british-expats-dream-into-a-nightmare/?do=findComment&comment=18875192

 

As far as I know, there is no 6 month requirement, you simply have to establish that you are back in the UK permanently - i.e. have a checkable address, bank account, register with a doctor etc.  However, there is no legal definition of 'permanent' - your plans can change as you so wish.  I believe the 6 month thing is just something that's been kicked around and as with a lot of stories that are passed from person to person, it's become 'law' - law without foundation.

Therefore, once you establish a degree of permanence and receive your pension increases, as far as I know, you can change your plans and move abroad again. You would of course, not receive any future increases after you leave.

9 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I agree with most of your post but you are wrong on the tax, I wasn't a particular high wage earner and my state pension is over the tax threshold.

Don't forget that those on an occupational pension were having that pension boosted by being contracted out of SERPS. This tends to distort what is seen as the state pension.

Many in Thailand will be receiving a pension that was partially funded by NI and is index linked, another factor in the injustice.

Basic state pension is £169.50 per week - £8814 per year.

Full state pension is £221.20 per week - £11502 per year.

The current tax threshold is £12570 per year.

If you receive over £12570 per year in pension you are clearly on an enhanced pension or have a private pension.

I just don't see what is fair about the frozen pension rule or why it was ever enacted in the first place.  However, given that the vast majority of MP's (of any flavour) are well off types - even billionaires, such a rule won't matter to them will it?