UK pensions

[evadgib]

Guy OppermanThe Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

 

The UK State Pension will remain payable worldwide following our departure from the EU. We have now reached agreement with the EU to maintain State Pension up-rating for those covered by the Withdrawal Agreement, subject to reciprocity. 

 

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2018-10-25.183890.h&s=State+Retirement+Pensions+British+Nationals+Abroad&fbclid=IwAR1bDxX0Q8YydhRKIrMs4t8LuOO9ad3E_gXJO5eyEVxcekpKnCwBzSrxUQo

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

Guy OppermanThe Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

 

The UK State Pension will remain payable worldwide following our departure from the EU. We have now reached agreement with the EU to maintain State Pension up-rating for those covered by the Withdrawal Agreement, subject to reciprocity. 

 

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2018-10-25.183890.h&s=State+Retirement+Pensions+British+Nationals+Abroad&fbclid=IwAR1bDxX0Q8YydhRKIrMs4t8LuOO9ad3E_gXJO5eyEVxcekpKnCwBzSrxUQo

So to summarise this statement of utter drivel, the UK will guarantee to uprate the state pensions of its nationals who remain in the EU, only if the EU guarantee to do likewise for their nationals who remain in the UK !!!

Such a nonsensical reply serves to demonstrate that even those at ministerial level have not the slightest understanding of what they are talking about.

The power to uprate the state pension for those residing abroad does not reside with and is not contingent upon the approval of the EU, the Thai government, or any other foreign government or agency. The power and the willingness to uprate pensions abroad rests entirely with the UK government.

The EU will not dispatch its gun boats into the north sea if we decide to uprate pensions for our citizens who remain in their area.

[nong38]

3 hours ago, evadgib said:

Last week, on Wednesday 31st October, we went to Westminster where over thirty MPs met with Mum to discuss the issue of frozen pensions. Many showed their support and signed a letter to the Prime Minister calling on her to end the policy.

Mum then went to Number 10 Downing Street to present the petition with all your signatures on it. She was invited inside to discuss frozen pensions with one of Theresa May’s own special advisers, and even had tea with him.

None of this would be possible without your support....

 

https://www.change.org/p/stop-denying-my-mum-and-520-000-brits-their-full-uk-pension/u/23571129?recruiter=37925645&utm_source=share_update&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=facebook&fbclid=IwAR24mWswGmO_rhQKs4EFJEr5tOW9I-sgAXoAGZ17nQWggka4tUj6ZPTzcaA

Anne even got coverage in the John Lewis Pensioners magazine would you believe.

[steve187]

On 11/6/2018 at 8:19 PM, nong38 said:

If the authorities come calling and find you are not there and there is no evidence that you have been your sister could be charged with fraud, not your problem its hers just be aware things are not always simple as it appears.

charged with fraud for allowing her address to be used for her brother to receive mail, that would be hard to prove, there would have to be some admission of knowledge what the mail was and the purpose of using her address.

[DILLIGAD]

Are you not saying that your a resident there and it’s not just your correspondence address?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[simoh1490]

3 hours ago, DILLIGAD said:

Are you not saying that your a resident there and it’s not just your correspondence address?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The address is just for correspondence;

I have spent six months physically in the UK during 2018;

I own property in the UK that I Have lived in for more than 30 days during this tax year;

But...that property is rented out and I do not have anywhere to live in the UK;

I am currently at a house owned by my long term partner in Thailand and I will remain here until April 2019.

 

I believe all of the above means I am UK tax resident and resident also for any other purpose and that I am currently considered to be on holiday overseas as far as the rest of the world is concerned. Beyond April 6 2019 may be a different story which is why my accountant suggested we plan that strategy later.

[billd766]

From the ICPB newsletter this morning.

 

Dear ICBP Supporter,   What has now become an annual trip to confront Members of the U.K. Parliament and the media was planned to be different in 2018 with a much changed emphasis and a redirection of efforts.   The appointment of a new PR agency, Tendo Consulting, was part of the desire by the Board to raise the stakes in fight against the U.K. government.  The change of emphasis began a few months before the visit with a new website - endfrozenpensions.com - being specifically focused on what was going to be the main plank of our new campaign, the decorated war veteran, Anne Puckridge.  Added to this was the Change.org petition which rapidly achieved 218,660 signatures by the time it was delivered to 10 Downing Street.  More signatures are still being added so keep chasing friends and family. The delegation comprised Brian Owles - Chairman, BPiA, Ian Andexser - Chairman, CABP, Fiona Macleod also representing Canada, Anne Puckridge - the main focus of the campaign, Monica Philip - a Windrush immigrant and now a Caribbean frozen pensioner, and me, representing both ICBP and the Caribbean. Our week in London opened on the Monday with a meeting with a firm of solicitors to whom we put the suggestion of commencing fresh legal proceeding against the U.K. government.  The discussion was wide ranging and we are awaiting their written advice before deciding on any future action.  Meetings with other solicitors were planned for later in the day and on Tuesday. Also on the Monday I had a meeting with the High Commissioner for Antigua & Barbuda who is very supportive of  our campaign and agreed to have it raised when all the Caricom countries meet with the U.K. government which they do every two years, the next meeting being in mid 2019. In the afternoon we met with a second firm of solicitors who came up with some new angles and the recommendation that David Pannick QC should be consulted. On Tuesday Anne Puckridge was interviewed on BBC local radio which went out on various stations around the U.K..  After that, Anne and I were interviewed by the Financial Times - click here to see the article. The interview was followed by a photograph session in Old Palace Yard, Westminster and an interview with ITN which was shown on the lunchtime news the next day.  Unfortunately, the item is not available to watch but the live interview with Anne shown on the BBC lunch time news is available - click here.  However, the ITN news item is available in printed form - click here. Following the photograph session, Canadians, Ian and Fiona, left to meet with the Canadian High Commissioner who agreed to meet with British MPs and to raise the subject at every opportunity. Wednesday was the big day when we had our parliamentary drop-in at the House of Commons.  35 MPs and Peers attended with 34 agreeing to having their names listed on the website with only one Conservative MP declining the offer.  25 MPs signed a letter to Theresa May supporting the abolition of frozen pensions.  Both Anne and Monica Philip, met and were photographed with various MPs. Our other big event of the day was the visit to 10 Downing Street to deliver the petition containing 218,660 signatures (the petition is still open so keep getting people to sign).  Sir Roger Gale arranged for us to be invited into No. 10 to meet with a Special Advisor.  As is so often the case, the Special Advisor knew nothing about frozen pensions until carrying out some research the previous day.  At Sir Roger’s suggestion, I asked the Special Advisor for a face to face meeting with the Prime Minister.  He was a bit skeptical until I mentioned that Sir Roger had suggested it and would be following it up with Theresa May.  The Special Advisor indicated that it might be possible after Brexit, say late March or April. We had hoped to have war veteran, Bernard Jackson with us but he was taken into hospital the previous day and Monica Philip's sister was not well enough to travel from Leicester. A reporter and photographer from Associated Press met with us outside Downing Street and put the story out on the ‘wires’ which was then sent to local, national and international outlets. On Thursday Anne was interviewed live by the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2, click here to listen, and at the same time, recorded interview went out on the You & Yours show on BBC Radio 4, click here to listen. Other news media attention can be seen by clicking on the links below. 13 October: The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/oct/13/frozen-state-pensions-petition 22 October: Sunday Express https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1034285/theresa-may-state-pension-freeze-expats-brexit-latest 24 October: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45971266 4 November: Sunday Express https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1040563/pension-scandal-victim-work-and-pension On 26th October, Brian Owles met with and spoke to a delegation of the National Pensioners Convention who were lobbying Parliament. Our thanks must be extended to Sir Roger Gale who was responsible for organising the parliamentary side of the activities and to Tendo Consulting who worked tirelessly to get everything set up and to ensure everyone was where they should be when they should be. We are now in discussions with Tendo on how to capitalise on this success. I must personally thank my colleagues from Canada and Australia and Anne Puckridge and Monica Philip who put so much effort into getting our message over, especially Anne who, at 93, was a miracle. John J Duffy - Chairman, International Consortium of British Pensioners

[p414]

I think it will ,unfortunately, go nowhere.The case against frozen pensions reached the court of human rights some years back..The courts decided that the government pension ,that many of us paid into [compulsory] for a minimum of 44 years was deemed 'A GOVERNMENT BENEFIT'...As such we have no claim to change it.

[nong38]

Although we had no choice to pay into the scheme and therefore believed it to be an "entitlement" the government do indeed see it as a "benefit" whether we like it or not they are in control of the rules and the game, don't give up, never ever give up, make them feel ashamed of what they are doing and continue to do.

[mercman24]

did anyone see the chart as to the difference in the French, German and other EU countries pensions as compared to the UK,  i paid extra for years, and when they upped the pension a few years ago ,mine never got increased pro rata, so my friend who had not paid one penny in, now just gets a few quid less than me, so you can say those of us who were frugal, are subsidising those who have not been.

[transam]

21 minutes ago, p414 said:

I think it will ,unfortunately, go nowhere.The case against frozen pensions reached the court of human rights some years back..The courts decided that the government pension ,that many of us paid into [compulsory] for a minimum of 44 years was deemed 'A GOVERNMENT BENEFIT'...As such we have no claim to change it.

I think the bench vote was 5 for and 8 against, which to me shows many agreed that we were being stuffed..

[bert bloggs]

50 minutes ago, transam said:

I think the bench vote was 5 for and 8 against, which to me shows many agreed that we were being stuffed..

And who was it that fought tooth and nail to ensure we did not get the rises. TONY BLAIR FROM THE WORKING MANS LABOUR PARTY.

[evadgib]

This will be overturned as sure as night follows day & my gut feeling is that HMG will try doing so by stealth as part of their brexit fiasco while crossing their fingers hoping Sun readers won't notice; 'My taxes' an' all that! ☺

All we have to do is continue supporting the consortium; ideally by subscribing to both branches and not being afraid to use their PayPal button now and again.

Edited November 11, 2018 by evadgib

[pastprime]

•  

It is a degrading and insidious decision, the frozen pension,it eventually removes the ability of the aging pensioner to take care of himself/herself,in short eventually a murderous situation,take note of those relying on charity in Chiang Mai,not enough money to take themselves home,or care,more focus on them would spark more sympathy. 

 

The unfairness is not the fact its frozen,but the haphazard way its applied  some countries do / some  not   The argument that the pension money is not spent in the paying country (UK) is baseless, as nor is it in EU /US/ or other unfrozen countries around the world

 

Yes, jealousy rules the day,I'm not getting it,and nor are you, is the order of day,or so it seems the lurid detailing of what could happen (but never will) has filled this thread from time immemorial, at least from 2012 anyway,nothing happened,nothing will,anyway I'm not prepared to embark on the Titanic,and nor should anyone else,looking at the long term

 

•  

Edited November 11, 2018 by pastprime
sp

[evadgib]

4 minutes ago, pastprime said:

It is a degrading and insidious decision, the frozen pension,it eventually removes the ability of the aging pensioner to take care of himself/herself,in short eventually a murderous situation,take note of those relying on charity in Chiang Mai,not enough money to take themselves home,or care,more focus on them would spark more sympathy. 

 

The unfairness is not the fact its frozen,but the haphazard way its applied  some countries do / some  not   The argument that the pension money is not spent in the paying country (UK) is baseless, as nor is it in EU /US/ or other unfrozen countries around the world

 

Yes, jealousy rules the day,I'm not getting it,and nor are you, is the order of day,or so it seems the lurid detailing of what could happen (but never will) has filled this thread from time immemorial, at least from 2012 anyway,nothing happened,nothing will,anyway I'm not prepared to embark on the Titanic,and nor should anyone else,looking at the long term

Yet you only joined TV / this board a fortnight ago...?

[pastprime]

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Yet you only joined TV / this board a fortnight ago...?

Yes was based in PH before then,but still can read

[nong38]

12 minutes ago, pastprime said:

Yes was based in PH before then,but still can read

You are most welcome to the cause, please bring a bottle!

[pastprime]

2 minutes ago, nong38 said:

You are most welcome to the cause, please bring a bottle!

Not on the Titanic I'm not

[billd766]

1 hour ago, bert bloggs said:

And who was it that fought tooth and nail to ensure we did not get the rises. TONY BLAIR FROM THE WORKING MANS LABOUR PARTY.

Could I change your post just a little?

 

TONY BLAIR FROM THE WORKING RICH MANS LABOUR PARTY.

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, pastprime said:

Yes was based in PH before then,but still can read

If that's 'Philippines' there was no need.

[dick dasterdly]

On 11/6/2018 at 5:37 PM, simoh1490 said:

I have mail forwarding to my sisters address.

 

On 11/6/2018 at 8:19 PM, nong38 said:

If the authorities come calling and find you are not there and there is no evidence that you have been your sister could be charged with fraud, not your problem its hers just be aware things are not always simple as it appears.

 

On 11/7/2018 at 1:33 AM, simoh1490 said:

I never liked my sister anyway.

If this is a joke, you need to make some attempt to indicate this to be the case!

 

Or are you genuinely saying that you happily use your sister and, because you don't like her, have no problem with the possibility that she may get in trouble for being nice enough to help you out?!

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, p414 said:

I think it will ,unfortunately, go nowhere.The case against frozen pensions reached the court of human rights some years back..The courts decided that the government pension ,that many of us paid into [compulsory] for a minimum of 44 years was deemed 'A GOVERNMENT BENEFIT'...As such we have no claim to change it.

Sad and more than unfair, but true ☹️.

[simoh1490]

3 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

 

If this is a joke, you need to make some attempt to indicate this to be the case!

 

Or are you genuinely saying that you happily use your sister and, because you don't like her, have no problem with the possibility that she may get in trouble for being nice enough to help you out?!

I couldn't decide which reply to post so I'll post all my options:

 

Why and why do you need to know?

 

Oops, the humour and morality marshall has arrived.

 

Post 5046 sheds light.

[sandyf]

22 hours ago, Rajab Al Zarahni said:

So to summarise this statement of utter drivel, the UK will guarantee to uprate the state pensions of its nationals who remain in the EU, only if the EU guarantee to do likewise for their nationals who remain in the UK !!!

Such a nonsensical reply serves to demonstrate that even those at ministerial level have not the slightest understanding of what they are talking about.

The power to uprate the state pension for those residing abroad does not reside with and is not contingent upon the approval of the EU, the Thai government, or any other foreign government or agency. The power and the willingness to uprate pensions abroad rests entirely with the UK government.

The EU will not dispatch its gun boats into the north sea if we decide to uprate pensions for our citizens who remain in their area.

It is not as straightforward as that. This is the top level legislation that refers to various other regulations.

 

Persons not ordinarily resident in Great Britain

3. Regulation 5 of the Social Security Benefit (Persons Abroad) Regulations 1975(b) (application of disqualification in respect of up-rating of benefit) and regulation 21 of the State Pension Regulations 2015(c) (entitlement to state pension for overseas residents) shall apply to any additional benefit payable by virtue of the Up-rating Order and to any up-rating increase as defined in section 22(1) of the Pensions Act 2014 respectively.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/349/pdfs/uksi_20170349_en.pdf

 

This regulation quite clearly stops all overseas residents from up-rating but we know for a fact that some are, so there must be some other regulation that over rules the text below. We also know for a fact that the DWP refers to a reciprocal agreement so it seem fairly clear that those that do receive the up-rating do so under an agreement with the country concerned. Each regulation seems to refer to some other regulation and I gave up trying to find the text that refers to these agreements.

 

 Entitlement to state pension for overseas residents
(5) In all other cases, a person is not entitled to up-rating increases where, immediately before the up-rating increase comes into force, they were—

(a) entitled to a state pension under Part 1 of the 2014 Act; and
(b) an overseas resident.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2016/9780111141151

[sandyf]

This document gives a good insight into how the NI system operates.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/674004/CCS207_CCS0118727356-1_GAD_Up-rating_Report_2018_WEB_Accessible.pdf

[cleopatra2]

28 minutes ago, sandyf said:

It is not as straightforward as that. This is the top level legislation that refers to various other regulations.

 

Persons not ordinarily resident in Great Britain

3. Regulation 5 of the Social Security Benefit (Persons Abroad) Regulations 1975(b) (application of disqualification in respect of up-rating of benefit) and regulation 21 of the State Pension Regulations 2015(c) (entitlement to state pension for overseas residents) shall apply to any additional benefit payable by virtue of the Up-rating Order and to any up-rating increase as defined in section 22(1) of the Pensions Act 2014 respectively.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/349/pdfs/uksi_20170349_en.pdf

 

This regulation quite clearly stops all overseas residents from up-rating but we know for a fact that some are, so there must be some other regulation that over rules the text below. We also know for a fact that the DWP refers to a reciprocal agreement so it seem fairly clear that those that do receive the up-rating do so under an agreement with the country concerned. Each regulation seems to refer to some other regulation and I gave up trying to find the text that refers to these agreements.

 

 Entitlement to state pension for overseas residents
(5) In all other cases, a person is not entitled to up-rating increases where, immediately before the up-rating increase comes into force, they were—

(a) entitled to a state pension under Part 1 of the 2014 Act; and
(b) an overseas resident.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2016/9780111141151

International agreements take precedence over domestic law, example being double tax treaties

[nong38]

Daily Mail now has new money section of expats under the "this is money.co.uk" banner.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

6 hours ago, sandyf said:

It is not as straightforward as that. This is the top level legislation that refers to various other regulations.

 

Persons not ordinarily resident in Great Britain

3. Regulation 5 of the Social Security Benefit (Persons Abroad) Regulations 1975(b) (application of disqualification in respect of up-rating of benefit) and regulation 21 of the State Pension Regulations 2015(c) (entitlement to state pension for overseas residents) shall apply to any additional benefit payable by virtue of the Up-rating Order and to any up-rating increase as defined in section 22(1) of the Pensions Act 2014 respectively.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/349/pdfs/uksi_20170349_en.pdf

 

This regulation quite clearly stops all overseas residents from up-rating but we know for a fact that some are, so there must be some other regulation that over rules the text below. We also know for a fact that the DWP refers to a reciprocal agreement so it seem fairly clear that those that do receive the up-rating do so under an agreement with the country concerned. Each regulation seems to refer to some other regulation and I gave up trying to find the text that refers to these agreements.

 

 Entitlement to state pension for overseas residents
(5) In all other cases, a person is not entitled to up-rating increases where, immediately before the up-rating increase comes into force, they were—

(a) entitled to a state pension under Part 1 of the 2014 Act; and
(b) an overseas resident.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2016/9780111141151

I don't comprehend the essence of the point you are seeking to make.

I agree that there are regulations and legislative provisions preventing the up-rating of pensions in certain countries but not others. These have been made by the UK government and its predecessors. Pointedly, the same UK government is the only sovereign power that can change such regulations and legislative provisions. 

The essence of my point is that changes to these up-rating provisions are not contingent upon any reciprocity agreements or treaty obligations with any foreign power. 

 

You stated: " We also know for a fact that the DWP refers to a reciprocal agreement so it seem fairly clear that those that do receive the up-rating do so under an agreement with the country concerned"

Do you really believe that the Thai government, for example, has forbidden the UK government from updating the state pensions of its citizens residing in Thailand ?

 

We have a number of bespoke reciprocal agreements with a variety of different countries. The UK government has elected to use the fact or absence of an extant reciprocal SS agreement as a marker to divide countries into those where it will pay pension up-rating and those where it will not. It is not the content of each of these agreements which determines this but simply the existence of such an agreement. 

[pastprime]

The whole exercise of paying pensions,especially frozen/up rated one is buried under a mound of gobbledygook,what could be simpler than doing away with it all,and just paying it. agree Pension credit needs monitoring,but then they have not paid into the kitty,just do away with it all, a level playing field

  One thing does stand out,Brexit is def on the cards and a hard one, it will happen,but those UK citizens living in the EU will still be unfrozen at days end

Edited November 12, 2018 by pastprime

[sandyf]

9 hours ago, Rajab Al Zarahni said:

I don't comprehend the essence of the point you are seeking to make.

I agree that there are regulations and legislative provisions preventing the up-rating of pensions in certain countries but not others. These have been made by the UK government and its predecessors. Pointedly, the same UK government is the only sovereign power that can change such regulations and legislative provisions. 

The essence of my point is that changes to these up-rating provisions are not contingent upon any reciprocity agreements or treaty obligations with any foreign power. 

 

You stated: " We also know for a fact that the DWP refers to a reciprocal agreement so it seem fairly clear that those that do receive the up-rating do so under an agreement with the country concerned"

Do you really believe that the Thai government, for example, has forbidden the UK government from updating the state pensions of its citizens residing in Thailand ?

 

We have a number of bespoke reciprocal agreements with a variety of different countries. The UK government has elected to use the fact or absence of an extant reciprocal SS agreement as a marker to divide countries into those where it will pay pension up-rating and those where it will not. It is not the content of each of these agreements which determines this but simply the existence of such an agreement. 

You are going way off context.

"Do you really believe that the Thai government, for example, has forbidden the UK government from updating the state pensions of its citizens residing in Thailand ?"

The UK government stopped making reciprocal Social Security agreements over 30 years ago, they never made one with Thailand so no uprating. If they had made one it would have been subject to agreement by the Thai government.

 

"It is not the content of each of these agreements which determines this but simply the existence of such an agreement. "

It is all about the content, there is a Social Security agreement with Canada but the state pension is not included. From what I gather, at the time it was introduced the Canadian state pension could not be exported, after all they are reciprocal agreements.

 

It would appear that following brexit the UK is prepared to make a special case and create a new reciprocal agreement with the EU, but that would be subject to EU agreement. This is the easy option as it does not require any amendment to the existing Social Security legislation.

Apart from the actual cost of making the payments, the Social Security legislation is so interwoven it would take hours of debate in the House to get the changes made. I suspect that some that have promoted the cause have backed off when faced with reality.