UK pensions

[nontabury]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Supporter MP Yasmin Qureshi has tabled new Early Day Motion 363 on frozen pensions.

Although parliament is now in recess for summer, please write to your MP urging them to sign this.

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

Early days, so only 4 signatures. The important part is,how many MP 's will have signed by the beginning of September.

[loppylugs1]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Supporter MP Yasmin Qureshi has tabled new Early Day Motion 363 on frozen pensions.

Although parliament is now in recess for summer, please write to your MP urging them to sign this.

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

You would have to inquire as to the motives of this particular MP to instigate this Early Day nonsense. Would it be the fact that being Pakistani born most of her constituency would be of a similar disposition there in Bolton,and yes caught up in the "life certificate" investigations,and more than obviously into something else too.

I would go further at another suspicious "parachuted" ethnic into a safe seat ,NE Hampshire and now fronting yet another ethnic survival team meet

[evadgib]

Does anyone know what became of the last EDM? I wrote to 2 MP's at my former and current billing addresses but received the old 'we're cabinet ministers therefore we're not allowed' chestnut. It was also pretty clear that they privately didn't support the matter either. As both remain in situ there seems little mileage in trying again.

Edited July 27, 2015 by evadgib

[nontabury]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Supporter MP Yasmin Qureshi has tabled new Early Day Motion 363 on frozen pensions.

Although parliament is now in recess for summer, please write to your MP urging them to sign this.

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

You would have to inquire as to the motives of this particular MP to instigate this Early Day nonsense. Would it be the fact that being Pakistani born most of her constituency would be of a similar disposition there in Bolton,and yes caught up in the "life certificate" investigations,and more than obviously into something else too.

I would go further at another suspicious "parachuted" ethnic into a safe seat ,NE Hampshire and now fronting yet another ethnic survival team meet

OK, so she's Pakistani born,that might help our cause as parliament seems to want to pander to their wishes above the natives. Personally I think if those Pakistanis have contributed into the system they should be entitled to a yearly increase, regardless if the remain in the UK or wish to spend their remaining yrs in Pakistan. Another thought, would it not be better to give a yearly increase to those who would like to retire in Pakistan, this extra money could then be spent in their local community, rather than the British government giving the Pakistani government large amounts of foreign aid which then strangely disappears or goes toward that country ability to build an atomic weapon.

[nontabury]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Supporter MP Yasmin Qureshi has tabled new Early Day Motion 363 on frozen pensions.

Although parliament is now in recess for summer, please write to your MP urging them to sign this.

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

You would have to inquire as to the motives of this particular MP to instigate this Early Day nonsense. Would it be the fact that being Pakistani born most of her constituency would be of a similar disposition there in Bolton,and yes caught up in the "life certificate" investigations,and more than obviously into something else too.

I would go further at another suspicious "parachuted" ethnic into a safe seat ,NE Hampshire and now fronting yet another ethnic survival team meet

OK, so she's Pakistani born,that might help our cause as parliament seems to want to pander to their wishes above the natives. Personally I think if those Pakistanis have contributed into the system they should be entitled to a yearly increase, regardless if the remain in the UK or wish to spend their remaining yrs in Pakistan. Another thought, would it not be better to give a yearly increase to those who would like to retire in Pakistan, this extra money could then be spent in their local community, rather than the British government giving the Pakistani government large amounts of foreign aid which then strangely disappears or goes toward that country ability to build an atomic weapon.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Supporter MP Yasmin Qureshi has tabled new Early Day Motion 363 on frozen pensions.

Although parliament is now in recess for summer, please write to your MP urging them to sign this.

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

You would have to inquire as to the motives of this particular MP to instigate this Early Day nonsense. Would it be the fact that being Pakistani born most of her constituency would be of a similar disposition there in Bolton,and yes caught up in the "life certificate" investigations,and more than obviously into something else too.

I would go further at another suspicious "parachuted" ethnic into a safe seat ,NE Hampshire and now fronting yet another ethnic survival team meet

OK, so she's Pakistani born,that might help our cause as parliament seems to want to pander to their wishes above the natives. Personally I think if those Pakistanis have contributed into the system they should be entitled to a yearly increase, regardless if the remain in the UK or wish to spend their remaining yrs in Pakistan. Another thought, would it not be better to give a yearly increase to those who would like to retire in Pakistan, this extra money could then be spent in their local community, rather than the British government giving the Pakistani government large amounts of foreign aid which then strangely disappears or goes toward that country ability to build an atomic weapon.

Once somebody starts shouting about it being racist for those returning to retirement in India/Pakistan and the Caribbean having their pensions frozen then the left wing liberal elite will jostle for position to protest about it. If you are white and Anglo Saxon with a frozen pension then nobody will give a dam.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Rajab Al Zarahni

[loppylugs1]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Supporter MP Yasmin Qureshi has tabled new Early Day Motion 363 on frozen pensions.

Although parliament is now in recess for summer, please write to your MP urging them to sign this.

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

You would have to inquire as to the motives of this particular MP to instigate this Early Day nonsense. Would it be the fact that being Pakistani born most of her constituency would be of a similar disposition there in Bolton,and yes caught up in the "life certificate" investigations,and more than obviously into something else too.

I would go further at another suspicious "parachuted" ethnic into a safe seat ,NE Hampshire and now fronting yet another ethnic survival team meet

OK, so she's Pakistani born,that might help our cause as parliament seems to want to pander to their wishes above the natives. Personally I think if those Pakistanis have contributed into the system they should be entitled to a yearly increase, regardless if the remain in the UK or wish to spend their remaining yrs in Pakistan. Another thought, would it not be better to give a yearly increase to those who would like to retire in Pakistan, this extra money could then be spent in their local community, rather than the British government giving the Pakistani government large amounts of foreign aid which then strangely disappears or goes toward that country ability to build an atomic weapon.

No fear,they are getting it,dead or alive........It is its called Tower Hamlets

[Craig krup]

I emailed my MP asking him to support the EDM.

If anyone wanted a standard letter this is what I said.

Dear Mr [THEIR NAME],

I should be grateful if you would consider supporting Early Day Motion 363 which aims to remove the injustice of some pensioners being denied the uprating of their pensions in line with inflation if they choose to live in one country rather than another. Someone living in the Philippines, for example, will have their pension uprated, but should they live in neighbouring Thailand the pension will not be uprated. This is a particularly egregious policy given that it follows on from nothing more than a decision made by civil servants in the 1960s as regards which countries they thought British pensioners might retire to. There is no other rationale, although governments now seem to continue with the practice in order to simply save money.

Early Day Motion 363

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

Many thanks for your attention in this regard,

[Expattaff1308]

Does anyone know what became of the last EDM? I wrote to 2 MP's at my former and current billing addresses but received the old 'we're cabinet ministers therefore we're not allowed' chestnut. It was also pretty clear that they privately didn't support the matter either. As both remain in situ there seems little mileage in trying again.

Keep trying mate.

We can't give up, every time the matter comes up we have to keep plugging away or what will be the point.

[nong38]

I emailed my MP asking him to support the EDM.

If anyone wanted a standard letter this is what I said.

Dear Mr [THEIR NAME],

I should be grateful if you would consider supporting Early Day Motion 363 which aims to remove the injustice of some pensioners being denied the uprating of their pensions in line with inflation if they choose to live in one country rather than another. Someone living in the Philippines, for example, will have their pension uprated, but should they live in neighbouring Thailand the pension will not be uprated. This is a particularly egregious policy given that it follows on from nothing more than a decision made by civil servants in the 1960s as regards which countries they thought British pensioners might retire to. There is no other rationale, although governments now seem to continue with the practice in order to simply save money.

Early Day Motion 363

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

Many thanks for your attention in this regard,

It actually became law in 1955, without wishing to be pedantic, but you know these politicians will cease on anything to bowl it out.

[i claudius]

There are two hopes of getting the raised and one of them is Bob,call me cynical but the older you get the more you realize we are irrelevant,we don't vote and we will soon be dead ,so what use are we to politicians ? But keep on trying you get 10 out of 10 for effort

[Lite Beer]

I emailed my MP asking him to support the EDM.

If anyone wanted a standard letter this is what I said.

Dear Mr [THEIR NAME],

I should be grateful if you would consider supporting Early Day Motion 363 which aims to remove the injustice of some pensioners being denied the uprating of their pensions in line with inflation if they choose to live in one country rather than another. Someone living in the Philippines, for example, will have their pension uprated, but should they live in neighbouring Thailand the pension will not be uprated. This is a particularly egregious policy given that it follows on from nothing more than a decision made by civil servants in the 1960s as regards which countries they thought British pensioners might retire to. There is no other rationale, although governments now seem to continue with the practice in order to simply save money.

Early Day Motion 363

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2015-16/363

Many thanks for your attention in this regard,

Sent but unfortunately my MP is Eric Pickles.

[Craig krup]

It actually became law in 1955, without wishing to be pedantic, but you know these politicians will cease on anything to bowl it out.

They had some retired civil servant (I think) on Moneybox (Radio 4) and the explanation was just pathetic. It was all about negotiating bilateral deals with other countries, which is a total red herring. Once you've decided that the pension isn't an ex gratia payment, it's a right, then whether a deal has been negotiated with some other country is neither here nor there. The question as to where you go is of no more concern than what colour of pants you're wearing: it's your entitlement. To even make reference to deals with named countries is like saying, "We can't uprate your pension because there's an owl in a tree". If it's an entitlement it doesn't matter where you go, or what you spend it on. If you stayed in the UK and spent it buying jam for badgers that presumably would be your right. Why on Earth anyone thinks they can reduce your entitlement because you choose to buy chicken basil somewhere you don't have to chip ice off your nethers is beyond me.

God, I feel better for that.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

It actually became law in 1955, without wishing to be pedantic, but you know these politicians will cease on anything to bowl it out.

They had some retired civil servant (I think) on Moneybox (Radio 4) and the explanation was just pathetic. It was all about negotiating bilateral deals with other countries, which is a total red herring. Once you've decided that the pension isn't an ex gratia payment, it's a right, then whether a deal has been negotiated with some other country is neither here nor there. The question as to where you go is of no more concern than what colour of pants you're wearing: it's your entitlement. To even make reference to deals with named countries is like saying, "We can't uprate your pension because there's an owl in a tree". If it's an entitlement it doesn't matter where you go, or what you spend it on. If you stayed in the UK and spent it buying jam for badgers that presumably would be your right. Why on Earth anyone thinks they can reduce your entitlement because you choose to buy chicken basil somewhere you don't have to chip ice off your nethers is beyond me.

God, I feel better for that.

It's even worse than that. If we had previously been advised that the reason for frozen pensions was the owl up the tree, we would have shot the bloody thing and had done with it. It was difficult enough to trace it back to the 1955 changes. I doubt that any of the politicians who over the years have defended this policy were even aware of any of its content or even the date it originated. The beauty of citing the absence of a bi-lateral Social Security agreement is that no one could easily investigate the matter further. It's rather like saying "It was the decision of the bureau" It effectively buries the matter in a sea of obfuscation and complexity that only the most determined and able investigator would be capable of unraveling. Thankfully this smokescreen has been exposed and the last challenge to overcome is the outcry of it being unaffordable.

[loppylugs1]

There are two hopes of getting the raised and one of them is Bob,call me cynical but the older you get the more you realize we are irrelevant,we don't vote and we will soon be dead ,so what use are we to politicians ? But keep on trying you get 10 out of 10 for effort

Could not agree more,absolutely pointless exercise,pointless,all the while that pension gets smaller and smaller (in real terms),just wonder how much people can take if the OAP is the the main plank of survival.

It does not exactly become required reading viewing this thread,but it sure makes anybody reading it less depressed reading some comments of people in far worse boat

Has been commented on before ,and yes the "carrot and the stick" that a poster suggested,there is plenty of carrot,but no stick if other means are adopted, you just have to do it (maybe)

The Bolton MP will do this campaign far more harm than good ,the British public will surely realise what her agenda is and the people she is directly supporting,not the ex-pats dotted around the globe,but Pakistanis in yes her homeland,The rug will be pulled pretty smartish I suggest

Edited July 28, 2015 by loppylugs1

[jpinx]

It actually became law in 1955, without wishing to be pedantic, but you know these politicians will cease on anything to bowl it out.

They had some retired civil servant (I think) on Moneybox (Radio 4) and the explanation was just pathetic. It was all about negotiating bilateral deals with other countries, which is a total red herring. Once you've decided that the pension isn't an ex gratia payment, it's a right, then whether a deal has been negotiated with some other country is neither here nor there. The question as to where you go is of no more concern than what colour of pants you're wearing: it's your entitlement. To even make reference to deals with named countries is like saying, "We can't uprate your pension because there's an owl in a tree". If it's an entitlement it doesn't matter where you go, or what you spend it on. If you stayed in the UK and spent it buying jam for badgers that presumably would be your right. Why on Earth anyone thinks they can reduce your entitlement because you choose to buy chicken basil somewhere you don't have to chip ice off your nethers is beyond me.

God, I feel better for that.

Lovely Made my day reading that

There is no such things as an entitlement - it's all smoke and mirrors. The money's long spent and the latest admission that increases would be too expensive is just a way of admitting that the pensions paid today are not funded by wise investments of our contributions, but are paid for by the collections of taxes, etc from todays working population. You might as well tell pensioners to form an orderly queue outside every place of work and beg from the workers.

[green job]

It actually became law in 1955, without wishing to be pedantic, but you know these politicians will cease on anything to bowl it out.

They had some retired civil servant (I think) on Moneybox (Radio 4) and the explanation was just pathetic. It was all about negotiating bilateral deals with other countries, which is a total red herring. Once you've decided that the pension isn't an ex gratia payment, it's a right, then whether a deal has been negotiated with some other country is neither here nor there. The question as to where you go is of no more concern than what colour of pants you're wearing: it's your entitlement. To even make reference to deals with named countries is like saying, "We can't uprate your pension because there's an owl in a tree". If it's an entitlement it doesn't matter where you go, or what you spend it on. If you stayed in the UK and spent it buying jam for badgers that presumably would be your right. Why on Earth anyone thinks they can reduce your entitlement because you choose to buy chicken basil somewhere you don't have to chip ice off your nethers is beyond me.

God, I feel better for that.

Lovely Made my day reading that

There is no such things as an entitlement - it's all smoke and mirrors. The money's long spent and the latest admission that increases would be too expensive is just a way of admitting that the pensions paid today are not funded by wise investments of our contributions, but are paid for by the collections of taxes, etc from todays working population. You might as well tell pensioners to form an orderly queue outside every place of work and beg from the workers.

Yep And how long will it last? We,I have been lt down by our country in many ways, Not looking after ex sevice men correctly ( as other countys do )

Not supporting expats ( as other countrys do ) Letting in rediculous amounts of immigrants,who claim the benifits we are supposed to get ( as other countys do not do ) I could go on and on.

[Craig krup]

The AVC question from earlier on. One of my colleagues took severance and I clued her up to the fact that the new rules mean you can take your AVCs out as cash. The trick is to take the quarter tax free and then trickle the money out at a sum per month less than the personal allowance, telling your provider that it's your only source of income. If you don't do that they'll tax every payment is if that was going to be a monthly payment and leave you to claim it back - or wait until the automatic repayment kicks in - at the end of the year.

In some ways you can see the government's and the provider's point: they don't want to be trying to recover the tax from someone who's spent it, or is dead. Some of the pension providers try to muck you about by saying, "You have to take it all or buy an annuity". You then want to transfer it to somebody like Hargreaves Lansdown, because they'll let you trickle it out. Of course your existing provider may then try to hit you with a charge.

If you're UK resident and due a pension at 60 (teacher, say) then I think eighty grand in your AVCs at 55 is the sweet spot. Take a quarter leaves you with sixty, and there are sixty months to run down the rest tax free (or soon tax free, given the increased personal allowance) before you're sixty.

All of the above assumes UK resident for tax purposes. If you've a police or military pension before 55, and your pension plus any withdrawal from your AVCs is below the 40% tax band, as far as I can see you'd be as well taking everything up to the 40% band and getting your AVC money out. Your military/cop pension isn't going to stop, so you're never going to be able to avoid the basic rate, and then your state pension kicks in at 65 (or whenever) you'll definitely never have un-taxable income; you might even hit a higher rate.

[JetsetBkk]

The AVC question from earlier on. One of my colleagues took severance and I clued her up to the fact that the new rules mean you can take your AVCs out as cash. The trick is to take the quarter tax free and then trickle the money out at a sum per month less than the personal allowance

<snip>

Exactly what I do! Take it out less than the single person's allowance = No tax! Woo-hoo!

[evadgib]

Scam warning from HMG:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-warning-arm-yourself-with-the-facts-dont-lose-your-pension-to-scammers

Edited July 29, 2015 by evadgib

[evadgib]

'Later life' newsletters:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/later-life-newsletters-2015

Edited July 29, 2015 by evadgib

[JaseTheBass]

This may well have been covered before, but this is such a long thread and covers a multitude of UK pension issues that I simply don't have enough time to trawl through the whole thread - sorry.

The current basic pension is around £107pw (pls correct me if that is wrong). What is the minimum amount one has to pay in to get that amount upon reaching retirement age?

I left the UK when I was 31 (in 2001) and have lived here ever since. Would I be entitled to anything or would I have to top it up? If I didn't top it up, is there somewhere I can take a look at that tells me roughly what I might be entitled too?

Thanks.

[Expattaff1308]

This may well have been covered before, but this is such a long thread and covers a multitude of UK pension issues that I simply don't have enough time to trawl through the whole thread - sorry.

The current basic pension is around £107pw (pls correct me if that is wrong). What is the minimum amount one has to pay in to get that amount upon reaching retirement age?

I left the UK when I was 31 (in 2001) and have lived here ever since. Would I be entitled to anything or would I have to top it up? If I didn't top it up, is there somewhere I can take a look at that tells me roughly what I might be entitled too?

Thanks.

https://www.gov.uk/state-pension/overview

[Lite Beer]

This may well have been covered before, but this is such a long thread and covers a multitude of UK pension issues that I simply don't have enough time to trawl through the whole thread - sorry.

The current basic pension is around £107pw (pls correct me if that is wrong). What is the minimum amount one has to pay in to get that amount upon reaching retirement age?

I left the UK when I was 31 (in 2001) and have lived here ever since. Would I be entitled to anything or would I have to top it up? If I didn't top it up, is there somewhere I can take a look at that tells me roughly what I might be entitled too?

Thanks.

The truth is nobody has a clue.

By the time you retire the new system will be in force.

You would need to have made 35 years of contributions.

If not you will get a reduced amount providing you have paid more than 10 years.

You may be able to top it up.

[Expattaff1308]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

The Telegraph today highlights the impact of a frozen pension on a gentleman the ICBP has been trying to assist.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/Royal-Ballet-saves-sight-of-ex…

[evadgib]

That link doesnt work Taff.

Edit: it does now

Edited July 30, 2015 by evadgib

[ignis]

That link doesnt work Taff.

Try again http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatlife/11770245/Royal-Ballet-saves-sight-of-expat-pensioner.html

it works fine for me

[loppylugs1]

As a follow up poster quoted (Telegraph) article,it is a rule,not a law. There is nothing to stop anyone doing a few simple steps to ensure non-frozen.

As all the rubbish quoted over the years of jail,met at the airport rubbish,just what motivates anyone,anyone at all to quote fiction,malicious fiction at that,some sort of paranoid attention seeking self Public Advisory busybody

Just get on with it ,no investigation no punishments,no paying back anything if caught out,just frozen at the point the if DWP finds out,which never happens

[evadgib]

I know a couple that were rumbled by HMRC and are having to pay back AND spend months per tax year in UK in order to maintain their resident status.

It stinks!

Edited July 30, 2015 by evadgib

[loppylugs1]

I know a couple that were rumbled by HMRC and are having to pay back AND spend months per tax year in UK in order to maintain their resident status.

It stinks!

DWP and HMRC are different entities. yes if they were fiddling offshore tax or other tax liabilities the HMRC do come down like a ton of bricks. I should know,caught up in investigations years ago.

Look at the rules governing the old age pension,no penalties

sidenote The govt.are in one hell of a predicament over superannuation rules for uniformed public sector workers,last estimate the govt is liable for £535 million,Govt do not want to pay,early day motions etc being used to force their hand ,but one hell of an amount to award anyone,after they retired years ago. Sympathy for the govt

...and it always starts "I know someone" is it not possible to get first hand information,not what somebody states third hand

Edited July 30, 2015 by loppylugs1