Court Hearing Expat Pensions Case

[Rimmer]

A case that could affect the pensions of thousands of Britons who have retired abroad will be heard in a European court later.

A group of 14 pensioners who have moved abroad want their UK state pension to rise in line with inflation each year.

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

A two-hour hearing will be held at the European Court of Human Rights.

This is the latest stage in a long-running legal challenge, and will be the end of the line in the legal process.

A two-hour hearing is expected to take place in the Strasbourg court on Wednesday, but judgement in the case will not be made until March or April 2010.

One of those whose case is to be outlined during the hearing is Annette Carson, who emigrated to South Africa in 1989.

After emigrating, she continued to make full contributions to her UK state pension and, on retirement in 2000, began to receive pension payments.

But since then, the UK authorities have frozen the level of payments at £67.50 a week.

She took her case to various UK courts, including the House of Lords - where it was rejected. She, and other campaigners, claim that the rules are unfair as it penalises some people who have paid national insurance contributions all their lives.

However, the UK Department of Work and Pensions argues that the government's priority is to help the least well-off pensioners living in the UK.

Annual upratings of the UK state pension are paid to recipients living in the European Economic Area and Switzerland, as well as countries where there are reciprocal social security agreements such as the US, Jersey and Guernsey and Turkey.

Countries where pension payments to expats are frozen include Australia, Canada, Hong Kong and South Africa.

Source:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8232612.stm

Edited September 2, 2009 by Rimmer

[Rimmer]

Countries where pension payments to expats are frozen include Australia, Canada, Hong Kong and South Africa.

Source:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8232612.stm

And Thailand

[highchol]

You can see the next challenge....''well the country where i live has a higher rate of inflation than the uk, I want it index linked there.''

<deleted> where will it end.

Edited September 2, 2009 by highchol

[joskydive]

It shouldn't matter which country you decide to retire in. If you have made full contributions all your working life you should be entitled to full pension with yearly increments for the rest of your life.

Maybe the Government should look at the other side of the coin and see what they are saving because someone becomes an expat.

No requirement to see NHS Doctor when they get ill and require free prescriptions - not in the UK

No requirement for Home Help - not in the UK

No requirement for placement in Old peoples Homes - not in the UK

No requirement for free bus rides - not in the UK

No requirement for free meals on wheels - not in the UK

No requirement for Home Nursing if disabled - not in the UK

No yearly extra payment for fuel required incase of Hypothermia - not in the UK

No requirement for mobility Allowance - not in the UK

The list can go on and on. The government is saving all this already so I can't see how they are justifying penalising someone who has chosen to live abroad and has forgone all these perks just to get out of there.

Edited September 2, 2009 by joskydive

[highchol]

It shouldn't matter which country you decide to retire in. If you have made full contributions all your working life you should be entitled to full pension for the rest of your life.

Spot on and thats the case now, just no increases for people retiring to Thailand.

The state pension is set and based on UK resident pensioner needs. Maybe gov should look at where people are living, the relative costs of living there and adjust up/ down accordingly!

[esprit]

It shouldn't matter which country you decide to retire in. If you have made full contributions all your working life you should be entitled to full pension for the rest of your life.

Spot on and thats the case now, just no increases for people retiring to Thailand.

The state pension is set and based on UK resident pensioner needs. Maybe gov should look at where people are living, the relative costs of living there and adjust up/ down accordingly!

Actually that is totally Bullsh*t.

The UK pension is set at the minimum level the government think it can politically get away with. It is extremely difficult to live on the minimum pension payment in the UK. If it was truly based on what a pensioner needs then there would be no need for it to be "topped" up with all the other potentially claimable allowances. It is unfortunate that the seniors have too much pride to claim for these ancillary benefits and instead are the most worse of in Europe accordingy to surveys.

Perhaps the governement should look at what people make as a moral contribution to the country rather than monetary when deciding level of pensions. That being the case all those retirees who served in WW11 and subsequent conflicts would, quite rightly IMHO, be some of the best rewarded pensioners. Of course they will never catch up to the self-serving central and local government ex-officials.

Edited September 2, 2009 by esprit

[joskydive]

That being the case all those retirees who served in WW11 and subsequent conflicts would, quite rightly IMHO, be some of the best rewarded pensioners.

They have looked at the moral contribution to the country and then taxed the butt out it! Why do you think you see all the ex-military, old duffs, doing bodyguarding when they should be retired and enjoying their lives for once before they die?

[mahtin]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

[caf]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

Also it is being heard in the European court so even a positive ruling is not Thaialnd related.

[Eff1n2ret]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

It is a matter close to the heart of anyone retired in, or in my case about to retire to, Thailand and whose pension is frozen.

It's difficult to justify the current discrimination, and I hope that the European Court will overturn it. However, if they do, I'm not optimistic that the UK Government won't find some way of maintaining the status quo.

[patklang]

That being the case all those retirees who served in WW11 and subsequent conflicts would, quite rightly IMHO, be some of the best rewarded pensioners.

They have looked at the moral contribution to the country and then taxed the butt out it! Why do you think you see all the ex-military, old duffs, doing bodyguarding when they should be retired and enjoying their lives for once before they die?

All the ex military----------------------------- my mate has over 1200gbp per month and retired at 47

who are these old duffs working as body guards????? Surely not ex military as the retirement age many times is below 50

Excuse me if i have not understood your reply

Edited September 2, 2009 by patklang

[astral]

It shouldn't matter which country you decide to retire in. If you have made full contributions all your working life you should be entitled to full pension with yearly increments for the rest of your life.

Maybe the Government should look at the other side of the coin and see what they are saving because someone becomes an expat.

No requirement to see NHS Doctor when they get ill and require free prescriptions - not in the UK

No requirement for Home Help - not in the UK

No requirement for placement in Old peoples Homes - not in the UK

No requirement for free bus rides - not in the UK

No requirement for free meals on wheels - not in the UK

No requirement for Home Nursing if disabled - not in the UK

No yearly extra payment for fuel required incase of Hypothermia - not in the UK

No requirement for mobility Allowance - not in the UK

The list can go on and on. The government is saving all this already so I can't see how they are justifying penalising someone who has chosen to live abroad and has forgone all these perks just to get out of there.

Agreed.

We are saving them money by living overseas.............

no matter what country we live in.

Allowing increases for some and not others is outrageous.

PS very much Thailand related, for British Expats living in LOS.

[caf]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

It is a matter close to the heart of anyone retired in, or in my case about to retire to, Thailand and whose pension is frozen.

It's difficult to justify the current discrimination, and I hope that the European Court will overturn it. However, if they do, I'm not optimistic that the UK Government won't find some way of maintaining the status quo.

I agree an unfair discrimination but my post made the point that it is being heard by the European court so would never effect Thailand would it? The court can only overturn legislation effecting Europe. And then it would be appealed etc etc

[mahtin]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

The inference being that even should they win, only pensioners in Commonwealth countries would benefit.

Naturally still of interest to us.

Edited September 2, 2009 by mahtin

[Garry9999]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

Also it is being heard in the European court so even a positive ruling is not Thaialnd related.

Your right, it's not Thailand related, UK related.

[Orac]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

Also it is being heard in the European court so even a positive ruling is not Thaialnd related.

Your right, it's not Thailand related, UK related.

The European court can overule the UK courts and could apply any ruling to ALL expats including in Thailand (note that there is an expat in South Africa being considered). Even if they only rule on expats living in the EEA this would open the gates for an appeal, and set a precedence, for UK expats living worldwide.

[Garry9999]

UK expats living in the European Economic Area see their UK pension rise with the cost of living, but others in some Commonwealth countries do not.

Sadly not very Thailand-related.

Also it is being heard in the European court so even a positive ruling is not Thaialnd related.

Your right, it's not Thailand related, UK related.

The European court can overule the UK courts and could apply any ruling to ALL expats including in Thailand (note that there is an expat in South Africa being considered). Even if they only rule on expats living in the EEA this would open the gates for an appeal, and set a precedence, for UK expats living worldwide.

South Africa is (or was) a commonwealth country, where as Thailand isn't and never was.

[Orac]

South Africa is (or was) a commonwealth country, where as Thailand isn't and never was.

I understand that but the appeal is of an abuse against their human rights and not specifically commonwealth citizen rights (if such a thing exists) and therefore, if they win, the ruling should apply to all UK expats. Even if the ruling is narrow enough to specify expats living in commonwealth countries, the principal should make it fairly straightforward for campaign covering all expats.

[sleepyjohn]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Don't shoot the messenger, I'm not defending it, and sadly don't get a penny and never will.

[Orac]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Don't shoot the messenger, I'm not defending it, and sadly don't get a penny and never will.

I could be wrong, and it will be some time, if ever, that it effects me, but the issue seems to be one of fairness - pensions are index linked for some UK expats but not all. This includes the EEA countries which is perhaps arguable, however it also includes 15 others where there is an agreement between governments (the US is one which, incidentally, is not a commonwealth country).

The arguement seems to be that if someone has made their UK contributions, why should they get a larger pension if the live in some countries eg. US, Turkey, Jamaica - than others.

[endure]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Pension income generated in the UK gets taxed anyway, regardless of where you live (assuming that your income is greater than the personal allowance).

[SHYTALK]

Just been on the news that judgement deferred till next April 2010.

Commentators state that this court of appeal is last chance saloon, and expect govenment to win.

[billd766]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Pension income generated in the UK gets taxed anyway, regardless of where you live (assuming that your income is greater than the personal allowance).

The personal allowance for the current tax year is GBP 9,490.

As I became a pensioner in May of this year my pension after 44 years of contributions is GBP 5200 and the dependants allowance which I am in the process of claiming for my Thai wife will be GBP 3,380 bringing the total to GBP 8,580 and is in fact paid free of income tax where ever you live provided that your total income comes to less than GBP 9,490.

If your total income is greater than this you will pay 20% tax on everything above that amount.

Incidentally I have applied to get my wife a National Insurance number which will entitle her to a pension in her own right when she reaches pensionable age.

[billd766]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Pension income generated in the UK gets taxed anyway, regardless of where you live (assuming that your income is greater than the personal allowance).

The personal allowance for the current tax year is GBP 9,490.

As I became a pensioner in May of this year my pension after 44 years of contributions is GBP 5200 and the dependants allowance which I am in the process of claiming for my Thai wife will be GBP 3,380 bringing the total to GBP 8,580 and is in fact paid free of income tax where ever you live provided that your total income comes to less than GBP 9,490.

If your total income is greater than this you will pay 20% tax on everything above that amount.

Incidentally I have applied to get my wife a National Insurance number which will entitle her to a pension in her own right when she reaches pensionable age.

Someone sent me an email about this but I inadvertantly deleted it.

Could whoever it was please resend it.

Sorry

Billd766

[billd766]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Pension income generated in the UK gets taxed anyway, regardless of where you live (assuming that your income is greater than the personal allowance).

The personal allowance for the current tax year is GBP 9,490.

As I became a pensioner in May of this year my pension after 44 years of contributions is GBP 5200 and the dependants allowance which I am in the process of claiming for my Thai wife will be GBP 3,380 bringing the total to GBP 8,580 and is in fact paid free of income tax where ever you live provided that your total income comes to less than GBP 9,490.

If your total income is greater than this you will pay 20% tax on everything above that amount.

Incidentally I have applied to get my wife a National Insurance number which will entitle her to a pension in her own right when she reaches pensionable age.

Someone sent me an email about this but I inadvertantly deleted it. :D

Could whoever it was please resend it.

Sorry

Billd766

[caf]

South Africa is (or was) a commonwealth country, where as Thailand isn't and never was.

I understand that but the appeal is of an abuse against their human rights and not specifically commonwealth citizen rights (if such a thing exists) and therefore, if they win, the ruling should apply to all UK expats. Even if the ruling is narrow enough to specify expats living in commonwealth countries, the principal should make it fairly straightforward for campaign covering all expats.

You have summed it up well and you are absolutely right.

It COULD be made to apply to expats worldwide, that is within their remit.

In reality there will be appeals, if it gets that far, or new legislation will be adopted. Or maybe take it one step and include for Europe only.

The system is unfair. I completely agree but the thread is about what a european court is going to do. I think nothing.

[Bagwan]

Over one third of UK pensioners elect to live abroad and a popular view is that those peeps do not want to live in the UK any more - for a variety reasons. One of the prime reasons is that they cannot afford to. Whose fault is that? Those who elect to live abroad have been disenfranchised so that the politicos think that they can get away with anything.

The standard of care of the elderly in the UK is a disgrace and comes nowhere near what is available in Thailand for very little money. Who hasn't seen an old guy getting around with the aid of a walking frame tended by a nice Thai lady? She will do everything for him at a fraction of the UK cost of such a service. Others have pointed out the savings made by UK PLC when people pack up their tents and move and asking the Gov't to invest some of the money saved would make economic sense, may even encourage others to leave resulting in even more savings. In doing so they also assist in freeing up the housing market.

One thing that would bring the UK Government to its moral senses - if they could find the time after fiddling their expense claims that is - is for hordes of ex-pats to turn up at Heathrow stating that they are destitute and returning to the UK on a permanent basis and then making every possible claim against the Exchequer.

Ask not what your country can do for you but what can you do for your country. Pure rhetorical BS. After surviving the London Blitz and the V weapons, enduring the privations of food and fuel shortages, getting in harms way in Korea, Suez, Malaya and then Indonesia, and paying NI contributions in full, I don't think that I am being greedy in expecting a reasonable return on what I put into UK PLC.

N.B. I have not brought in a red herring mention of black, lesbian single mothers - but am thinking of becoming one.

Edited September 4, 2009 by Bagwan

[Kitsch22]

Over one third of UK pensioners elect to live abroad and a popular view is that those peeps do not want to live in the UK any more - for a variety reasons. One of the prime reasons is that they cannot afford to. Whose fault is that? Those who elect to live abroad have been disenfranchised so that the politicos think that they can get away with anything.

The standard of care of the elderly in the UK is a disgrace and comes nowhere near what is available in Thailand for very little money. Who hasn't seen an old guy getting around with the aid of a walking frame tended by a nice Thai lady? She will do everything for him at a fraction of the UK cost of such a service. Others have pointed out the savings made by UK PLC when people pack up their tents and move and asking the Gov't to invest some of the money saved would make economic sense, may even encourage others to leave resulting in even more savings. In doing so they also assist in freeing up the housing market.

One thing that would bring the UK Government to its moral senses - if they could find the time after fiddling their expense claims that is - is for hordes of ex-pats to turn up at Heathrow stating that they are destitute and returning to the UK on a permanent basis and then making every possible claim against the Exchequer.

Ask not what your country can do for you but what can you do for your country. Pure rhetorical BS. After surviving the London Blitz and the V weapons, enduring the privations of food and fuel shortages, getting in harms way in Korea, Suez, Malaya and then Indonesia, and paying NI contributions in full, I don't think that I am being greedy in expecting a reasonable return on what I put into UK PLC.

N.B. I have not brought in a red herring mention of black, lesbian single mothers - but am thinking of becoming one.

"A reasonable return on what I put into UK PLC"? If you provided sensibly for your old age by saving and if you have invested your savings sensibly, you will or should now have available to you the benefit of that capital and income.

Your past National Insurance contributions in UK were not savings; they were payments to the government of the day of a particular kind of tax.

In UK there is a general policy (not superbly implemented, but better than nothing) that people living within the territory should be saved by the state from utter poverty and destitution. The safety net is slung at a fairly low level, but it is there and nobody starves.

Your statement that you think that the standard of care for the elderly in UK is a disgrace seems to imply that you think that I (who have made provision for my own old age and who am ready if and when required to care for my own parents) should be required to pay for more than basic and essential support for people who (or whose families) have failed to make adequate provision for themselves. As matters stand I am prepared to chip in to keep them housed and marginally above the breadline but I do not understand why I should be required to contribute to a higher standard of luxury than that.

If you think that the situation in UK is disgraceful then what is your view of the comparable situation in Thailand? The fact of the matter is that an expat pensioner having moved from UK to Thailand even without inflation proofing receives a sum sufficient to attract envy from the majority of Thais of similar age.

[Maximus33]

There is one arguable element of justification for the government.

If the pensioner lives and spends in the UK the money goes round in the British system and gets taxed and retaxed and some of it gets recouped into the common coffers.

Pension income generated in the UK gets taxed anyway, regardless of where you live (assuming that your income is greater than the personal allowance).

The personal allowance for the current tax year is GBP 9,490.

As I became a pensioner in May of this year my pension after 44 years of contributions is GBP 5200 and the dependants allowance which I am in the process of claiming for my Thai wife will be GBP 3,380 bringing the total to GBP 8,580 and is in fact paid free of income tax where ever you live provided that your total income comes to less than GBP 9,490.

If your total income is greater than this you will pay 20% tax on everything above that amount.

Incidentally I have applied to get my wife a National Insurance number which will entitle her to a pension in her own right when she reaches pensionable age.

Perhaps I can help,

1) The Basic State Pension is based upon the number of years National Insurance contributions made. If you are married, you are entitled to the greater of both persons single pensions (single persons are only payable as each person reaches state pension age) and the married couples pension. If your wife paid no NI, she wont get a pension on her own.

2) You are correct the State pension is taxable at the highest rate you would pay (so nil, 20%, 40% snd 50% coming soon) depending on your overall taxable income.

[Maximus33]

South Africa is (or was) a commonwealth country, where as Thailand isn't and never was.

I understand that but the appeal is of an abuse against their human rights and not specifically commonwealth citizen rights (if such a thing exists) and therefore, if they win, the ruling should apply to all UK expats. Even if the ruling is narrow enough to specify expats living in commonwealth countries, the principal should make it fairly straightforward for campaign covering all expats.

You have summed it up well and you are absolutely right.

It COULD be made to apply to expats worldwide, that is within their remit.

In reality there will be appeals, if it gets that far, or new legislation will be adopted. Or maybe take it one step and include for Europe only.

The system is unfair. I completely agree but the thread is about what a european court is going to do. I think nothing.

I agree, it is nothing to do with where you are, commonwealth, Europe, etc. But, ff the European Court decides the UK is wrong, they will have to make the increase to ALL pensioners EVERYWHERE. The European court is the highest court of appeal in the UK and so is looking at whether UK law is fair for everyone, not just from a European perspective.