UK pensions

[i claudius]

You'll forgive me for not seeing things the same way, but:

if a person contracts out of the NI system they are expected to and in most case do receive a higher rate of return for their payments. The fact that the state pension is reduced as a result of that gamble seems entirely appropriate to me, indeed, my state pension was reduced for this reason but overall I am substantially better off for having contracted out.

There are 2 different routes here, occupational and private. Generally speaking the occupational schemes gave a much better return than the state additional pension.

In 1988 when the option for individuals to opt out became available, all the advisors said pack it in and get an APP, then 10 to 15 years later they all did a U turn. I stayed in but know many that went private and most have failed to make a decent return.

If you are better off for opting out as an individual, then well done. The majority of people that are better off, the decision to contract out was taken for them.

The point that has been in question is not how contracting out has affected pensions, but how contracting out will affect pensions after next April.

I opted out for a few years ,i then left the company and was advised by my brother ,who has his own company to opt back into serps ,so glad i did ,thanks Bro.

[Expattaff1308]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Coverage in the Guardian regarding Jeremy Corbyn's support.

http://www.theguardian.com/…/aug/15/hope-for-expats-uk-pens…

Keith Vaz MP writes about the discrimination of frozen pensions.

http://www.theguardian.com/…/a…/15/keith-vaz-frozen-pensions

Edited August 21, 2015 by Expattaff1308

[sandyf]

You'll forgive me for not seeing things the same way, but:

if a person contracts out of the NI system they are expected to and in most case do receive a higher rate of return for their payments. The fact that the state pension is reduced as a result of that gamble seems entirely appropriate to me, indeed, my state pension was reduced for this reason but overall I am substantially better off for having contracted out.

There are 2 different routes here, occupational and private. Generally speaking the occupational schemes gave a much better return than the state additional pension.

In 1988 when the option for individuals to opt out became available, all the advisors said pack it in and get an APP, then 10 to 15 years later they all did a U turn. I stayed in but know many that went private and most have failed to make a decent return.

If you are better off for opting out as an individual, then well done. The majority of people that are better off, the decision to contract out was taken for them.

The point that has been in question is not how contracting out has affected pensions, but how contracting out will affect pensions after next April.

I opted out for a few years ,i then left the company and was advised by my brother ,who has his own company to opt back into serps ,so glad i did ,thanks Bro.

Was your opting out optional? I went to work for a company and had no choice, you had to join the company pension scheme. The job did not last very long, made redundant after about 14 months. All contributions, including employers, were repaid immediately under the Inland Revenue triviality ruling.

[Jip99]

You'll forgive me for not seeing things the same way, but:

if a person contracts out of the NI system they are expected to and in most case do receive a higher rate of return for their payments. The fact that the state pension is reduced as a result of that gamble seems entirely appropriate to me, indeed, my state pension was reduced for this reason but overall I am substantially better off for having contracted out.

There are 2 different routes here, occupational and private. Generally speaking the occupational schemes gave a much better return than the state additional pension.

In 1988 when the option for individuals to opt out became available, all the advisors said pack it in and get an APP, then 10 to 15 years later they all did a U turn. I stayed in but know many that went private and most have failed to make a decent return.

If you are better off for opting out as an individual, then well done. The majority of people that are better off, the decision to contract out was taken for them.

The point that has been in question is not how contracting out has affected pensions, but how contracting out will affect pensions after next April.

I opted out for a few years ,i then left the company and was advised by my brother ,who has his own company to opt back into serps ,so glad i did ,thanks Bro.

Was your opting out optional? I went to work for a company and had no choice, you had to join the company pension scheme. The job did not last very long, made redundant after about 14 months. All contributions, including employers, were repaid immediately under the Inland Revenue triviality ruling.

Mine wasn't optional but as it was a non-contributory scheme that put 20% of my salary into the fund I wasn't too concerned.

[nong38]

I wonder if Mr Vaz is thinking of returning to his cultural homeland and has just realized what the pension position is?

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

I wonder if Mr Vaz is thinking of returning to his cultural homeland and has just realized what the pension position is?

How mean spirited of you to suggest he was motivated by self interest,particularly given his staunch support to the owners of Indian takeaway's.

Rather, the likelihood is that his conscience was troubled at hearing of all the English, white Anglo Saxon, protestants who have migrated to Thailand.

[evadgib]

Keeping the board active:

Have your say on the UK minimum wage rates

HMRC Tax Receipts and National Insurance Contributions for the UK

The police pensions scheme 2015 member’s guide

Edited August 22, 2015 by evadgib

[JB300]

Keeping the board active:

Have your say on the UK minimum wage rates

HMRC Tax Receipts and National Insurance Contributions for the UK

The police pensions scheme 2015 member’s guide

For some reason your post came up blank on Tapatalk for the IPhone so I've taken the liberty of reposting your links...

Have your say on the UK minimum wage rates

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/have-your-say-on-the-uk-minimum-wage-rates

HMRC Tax Receipts and National Insurance Contributions for the UK

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hmrc-tax-and-nics-receipts-for-the-uk

The police pensions scheme 2015 member’s guide

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-police-pensions-scheme-2015-members-guide

Cheers

JB

Edited August 22, 2015 by JB300

[evadgib]

Thanks JB, I noted probs too but thought it was just my PC.

[i claudius]

The International Consortium of British Pensioners (ICBP)

Coverage in the Guardian regarding Jeremy Corbyn's support.

http://www.theguardian.com/…/aug/15/hope-for-expats-uk-pens…

Keith Vaz MP writes about the discrimination of frozen pensions.

http://www.theguardian.com/…/a…/15/keith-vaz-frozen-pensions

Anything written in the guardian is a waste of time , hardly anyone reads it for a start , and if they do its just chalked up as more left wing twaddle.

[thaibeachlovers]

I made this point before, but got nil support.

Pensioners living in the UK will likely plough ALL their money back into the economy there, buying their food and paying tax such as VAT.

Ex-pats, by definition will put most of their pension into the coffers of their country of choice.

I agree with the existing situation.

I agree this is a very valid reason. Expanding your argument further, it's about more than just taxes.

Money spent in the UK has a "multiplier effect" on the UK economy. i.e you spend a pound, and the recipient of that pound in turn will likely spend at least part of that pound on buying something else from someone else, who in turn spends and so on. The result is greater domestic demand and a stronger UK economy which creates jobs for people who in turn spend money and are less reliant on the state. The result: many benefits to the UK + the whole country ends up in a better place. Looked at another way a pension spent in the UK costs the government less than a pension spent in Thailand

On the other hand a pensioner spending their pension in Thailand benefits the Thai economy, and creates Thai jobs etc, with no real benefit to UK. The UK already gives away far too much to non-UK nationals that it shouldn't do. The country is in bad shape financially, and struggling with its debts.

Also to be borne in mind:

- For people who say they have paid all their lives into the UK system. Remember 1) they contributed nothing for the first 16 years or so of their lives 2) They have had other non-pension benefits already, such as healthcare 3) The UK system doesn't save their money for the future in a magic pot somewhere, they spend it as it comes in. 4) Everyone knows existing workers (partly) fund existing pensioners, which is becoming more and more unsustainable each day + 5) Why should existing workers in the UK be creating jobs in Thailand which could actually take away jobs in their own country. Thailand sets a fine example of nationalism and protectionism and generally gives little or zero in policies that really benefit foreigners.

- The overseas pensioner usually knows the rules of the game and it's their choice to live in Thailand

- If pensions for overseas people not contributing any longer to the UK were increased, the government would simply take it off other needy areas of society. It's not as if they have a large pot of money as an excess. The UK spends more than it earns. In all likelihood, they'd reduce all pensioners over time rather than increase. eg when they equalised pension ages for men and women, all that happened is everyone ended up with a worse deal and lowest comoon denominator over time

If thinking only of myself and my family, I'd be in favour of equalising the pensions so I personally get more.

Looking at the bigger picture, and with a little less self interest, it's probably better for the UK I get a lower pension, and it goes to the people in the UK that need it, and benefits the UK. I knew the score when I signed up. I don't contribute much to the UK these days, so why should I get handouts of people I've never met.

(BTW That's no excuse for the government to continue wasting money in the ways it does, and not looking after its own nationals at the expense of foreigners in many other areas too)

Every pensioner that lives overseas saves the government more than they cost by not using the NHS. This huge money pit needs a complete overhaul, though that will probably never happen. Have you ANY idea as to how much a stroke patient will cost the taxpayer?

If all pensioners came back to the UK the NHS would go broke in short order, plus the bill for pensioner housing, fuel allowance, free transport and medications.

If the government doesn't want to give pensioners overseas money, then they should put restrictions on how much can be taken out of the country.

[transam]

I made this point before, but got nil support.

Pensioners living in the UK will likely plough ALL their money back into the economy there, buying their food and paying tax such as VAT.

Ex-pats, by definition will put most of their pension into the coffers of their country of choice.

I agree with the existing situation.

I agree this is a very valid reason. Expanding your argument further, it's about more than just taxes.

Money spent in the UK has a "multiplier effect" on the UK economy. i.e you spend a pound, and the recipient of that pound in turn will likely spend at least part of that pound on buying something else from someone else, who in turn spends and so on. The result is greater domestic demand and a stronger UK economy which creates jobs for people who in turn spend money and are less reliant on the state. The result: many benefits to the UK + the whole country ends up in a better place. Looked at another way a pension spent in the UK costs the government less than a pension spent in Thailand

On the other hand a pensioner spending their pension in Thailand benefits the Thai economy, and creates Thai jobs etc, with no real benefit to UK. The UK already gives away far too much to non-UK nationals that it shouldn't do. The country is in bad shape financially, and struggling with its debts.

Also to be borne in mind:

- For people who say they have paid all their lives into the UK system. Remember 1) they contributed nothing for the first 16 years or so of their lives 2) They have had other non-pension benefits already, such as healthcare 3) The UK system doesn't save their money for the future in a magic pot somewhere, they spend it as it comes in. 4) Everyone knows existing workers (partly) fund existing pensioners, which is becoming more and more unsustainable each day + 5) Why should existing workers in the UK be creating jobs in Thailand which could actually take away jobs in their own country. Thailand sets a fine example of nationalism and protectionism and generally gives little or zero in policies that really benefit foreigners.

- The overseas pensioner usually knows the rules of the game and it's their choice to live in Thailand

- If pensions for overseas people not contributing any longer to the UK were increased, the government would simply take it off other needy areas of society. It's not as if they have a large pot of money as an excess. The UK spends more than it earns. In all likelihood, they'd reduce all pensioners over time rather than increase. eg when they equalised pension ages for men and women, all that happened is everyone ended up with a worse deal and lowest comoon denominator over time

If thinking only of myself and my family, I'd be in favour of equalising the pensions so I personally get more.

Looking at the bigger picture, and with a little less self interest, it's probably better for the UK I get a lower pension, and it goes to the people in the UK that need it, and benefits the UK. I knew the score when I signed up. I don't contribute much to the UK these days, so why should I get handouts of people I've never met.

(BTW That's no excuse for the government to continue wasting money in the ways it does, and not looking after its own nationals at the expense of foreigners in many other areas too)

Every pensioner that lives overseas saves the government more than they cost by not using the NHS. This huge money pit needs a complete overhaul, though that will probably never happen. Have you ANY idea as to how much a stroke patient will cost the taxpayer?

If all pensioners came back to the UK the NHS would go broke in short order, plus the bill for pensioner housing, fuel allowance, free transport and medications.

If the government doesn't want to give pensioners overseas money, then they should put restrictions on how much can be taken out of the country.

And foreign scroungers INTO the UK...

[sandyf]

I made this point before, but got nil support.

Pensioners living in the UK will likely plough ALL their money back into the economy there, buying their food and paying tax such as VAT.

Ex-pats, by definition will put most of their pension into the coffers of their country of choice.

I agree with the existing situation.

I agree this is a very valid reason. Expanding your argument further, it's about more than just taxes.

Money spent in the UK has a "multiplier effect" on the UK economy. i.e you spend a pound, and the recipient of that pound in turn will likely spend at least part of that pound on buying something else from someone else, who in turn spends and so on. The result is greater domestic demand and a stronger UK economy which creates jobs for people who in turn spend money and are less reliant on the state. The result: many benefits to the UK + the whole country ends up in a better place. Looked at another way a pension spent in the UK costs the government less than a pension spent in Thailand

On the other hand a pensioner spending their pension in Thailand benefits the Thai economy, and creates Thai jobs etc, with no real benefit to UK. The UK already gives away far too much to non-UK nationals that it shouldn't do. The country is in bad shape financially, and struggling with its debts.

Also to be borne in mind:

- For people who say they have paid all their lives into the UK system. Remember 1) they contributed nothing for the first 16 years or so of their lives 2) They have had other non-pension benefits already, such as healthcare 3) The UK system doesn't save their money for the future in a magic pot somewhere, they spend it as it comes in. 4) Everyone knows existing workers (partly) fund existing pensioners, which is becoming more and more unsustainable each day + 5) Why should existing workers in the UK be creating jobs in Thailand which could actually take away jobs in their own country. Thailand sets a fine example of nationalism and protectionism and generally gives little or zero in policies that really benefit foreigners.

- The overseas pensioner usually knows the rules of the game and it's their choice to live in Thailand

- If pensions for overseas people not contributing any longer to the UK were increased, the government would simply take it off other needy areas of society. It's not as if they have a large pot of money as an excess. The UK spends more than it earns. In all likelihood, they'd reduce all pensioners over time rather than increase. eg when they equalised pension ages for men and women, all that happened is everyone ended up with a worse deal and lowest comoon denominator over time

If thinking only of myself and my family, I'd be in favour of equalising the pensions so I personally get more.

Looking at the bigger picture, and with a little less self interest, it's probably better for the UK I get a lower pension, and it goes to the people in the UK that need it, and benefits the UK. I knew the score when I signed up. I don't contribute much to the UK these days, so why should I get handouts of people I've never met.

(BTW That's no excuse for the government to continue wasting money in the ways it does, and not looking after its own nationals at the expense of foreigners in many other areas too)

Every pensioner that lives overseas saves the government more than they cost by not using the NHS. This huge money pit needs a complete overhaul, though that will probably never happen. Have you ANY idea as to how much a stroke patient will cost the taxpayer?

If all pensioners came back to the UK the NHS would go broke in short order, plus the bill for pensioner housing, fuel allowance, free transport and medications.

If the government doesn't want to give pensioners overseas money, then they should put restrictions on how much can be taken out of the country.

Valid points but how pensioners spend their income has absolutely nothing to do with it.

People who live in the UK and expats alike were forced into the UK state pension scheme under the same terms and conditions. It is quite immoral that when the time comes to pay out on that scheme, one sector of the community is now faced with a different set of conditions.

The government screwed up and if they need to make reductions, then those reductions should affect everyone. Of course political suicide comes into play so they pick on the soft targets.

last year, 12 percent of the tax on my pension went to fund state pensions, who does that make sense to?

[nong38]

I wonder if Mr Vaz is thinking of returning to his cultural homeland and has just realized what the pension position is?

How mean spirited of you to suggest he was motivated by self interest,particularly given his staunch support to the owners of Indian takeaway's.

Rather, the likelihood is that his conscience was troubled at hearing of all the English, white Anglo Saxon, protestants who have migrated to Thailand.

Must admit I had not thought of that as I do not frequent such dens of inequity, thank you for wisdom!

Are pension increases frozen in Leicester does anyone know?

[nong38]

You will all no doubt be over joyed at hearing the news that another one of our overseas petty cash recipients, Somalia, is thinking of joining the space programme. From what I saw last time I was back there must plenty of extra benefits being sent back as well, they come down the pavement like Bonanza, 4 abreast-get out of the way!

Edited August 27, 2015 by nong38

[Lite Beer]

I received a reply from Rt Hon Sir Eric Pickles MP to my E Mail that he did not even appear to read.

Poor sod is so overworked that he has no time to read my message to him.

He has a hard life.

Dear Mr Pickles

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.parliamen...edm/2015-16/363

Many thanks for your attention in this regard,

Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx,

Please see below the response from Sir Eric and my apologies for the delay in responding. I would be most grateful if you could please confirm your postal address for our records.

“Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx,

Thank you for contacting me about state pensions uprating.

I am encouraged that the Government remains committed to protecting those who have worked hard all their lives. The Government has introduced a 'triple lock' for the basic state pension. This means that the basic state pension is uprated every year by whichever is highest of inflation, earnings, or 2.5 per cent. This year, this has meant a £2.85 increase to the basic state pension to £115.95 per week.

Pension credit works slightly differently. As I'm sure you know, pension credit comprises of two elements: guaranteed credit and savings credit. Many of the poorest pensioners depend on guaranteed credit, so the Government has decided to uprate that element by 1.9 per cent, which is above the 0.6 per cent they were legally obliged to do.

This increase has been funded by increasing the threshold for the savings credit element of pension credit, meaning that some people who claim the savings credit element will see a more modest increase. However, I am happy to report that SERPS pensions have been uprated by 1.2 per cent - the full value of inflation. This is in contrast to the approach of the previous Government, who froze SERPS pensions in 2010.

I hope that this is helpful in understanding the decisions the Government has taken on pensions uprating. I am very proud that the Government's long-term economic plan has meant the country can afford to increase the basic state pension by £950 this Parliament, alongside protecting other benefits pensioners depend on - such as the Winter Fuel Payment, free bus passes and TV licences, and I am proud that the Conservative Party is committed to protect them for the next Parliament too.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Rt Hon Sir Eric Pickles MP”

Karen Sheehan

Parliamentary Assistant to

The Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP

Tel: 020 7219 4428

[Lite Beer]

I did reply: Pointless as the man is a moron.

Hello and thanks for the reply.

However is there any chance Sir Eric could actually read my message before responding?

It might help.

[evadgib]

Come on LB, You know who really wrote that ....

[Lite Beer]

Come on LB, You know who really wrote that ....

You mean that good old Eric had nothing to do with it?

I am totally shocked.

He is a wonderful MP and we all love him.

[bangmai]

It seems like pensioners would be saving the UK Government a lot of money by not using the NHS. In 2012, Romney wanted to give retirees vouchers to get healthcare outside of Medicare....would have been total win/win for everyone. He didn't win and we, in LOS, were left with only "Hope and Chang."

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

It seems like pensioners would be saving the UK Government a lot of money by not using the NHS. In 2012, Romney wanted to give retirees vouchers to get healthcare outside of Medicare....would have been total win/win for everyone. He didn't win and we, in LOS, were left with only "Hope and Chang."

The saving is not just in the NHS. Social Services,, Social Housing, Pension Credit, the Winter Fuel Allowance, Free Prescriptions, the Bus Pass to name but a few. Furthermore, all UK pensions are taxed at source so depending on your income you could even be paying 40 or 45 % income tax on your pensions for nothing more than the possibility that you might be a user of the Consular service during your period in Thailand. Most of those who post hostile comments on the frozen pension issue seem to be completely unaware that many expat UK pensioners are also UK taxpayers, even higher rate taxpayers !

[meatboy]

It seems like pensioners would be saving the UK Government a lot of money by not using the NHS. In 2012, Romney wanted to give retirees vouchers to get healthcare outside of Medicare....would have been total win/win for everyone. He didn't win and we, in LOS, were left with only "Hope and Chang."

The saving is not just in the NHS. Social Services,, Social Housing, Pension Credit, the Winter Fuel Allowance, Free Prescriptions, the Bus Pass to name but a few. Furthermore, all UK pensions are taxed at source so depending on your income you could even be paying 40 or 45 % income tax on your pensions for nothing more than the possibility that you might be a user of the Consular service during your period in Thailand. Most of those who post hostile comments on the frozen pension issue seem to be completely unaware that many expat UK pensioners are also UK taxpayers, even higher rate taxpayers !

tax payer in the uk.YES.

every month i have to purchase 7different meds.WHO PAYS ME.

every month i have to have an INR.TEST. WHO PAYS ME.

every 6months i have a cholesteral check.WHO PAYS ME.

fully paid up member of the NI.CLUB 44YRS.

do i get a uk pension.YES IT HELPS TO PAY FOR THE ABOVE.

and not forgetting its the same as what i got 6YRS.AGO.

[bangmai]

I'm from the US, but from recent reports, the UK citizens are getting the run-a-round in CM. Consulate closed, and they have to jump through lots of hoops for a simple passport renewal...like two roundtrips to BKK. Australian consulate closed, too. This at a time when there is an ever increasing number of expats in CM, and you would think the outrageous fees they charge could pay for the facility.

[Ace of Pop]

Try Sailing to Thailand.Present perfect papers in Malaya Singapore , cleared in 30 mins. Phuket 3 Days of idiots.

[Ricardo]

Try Sailing to Thailand.Present perfect papers in Malaya Singapore , cleared in 30 mins. Phuket 3 Days of idiots.

Perhaps you should have come by submarine ?

[JB300]

I'm from the US, but from recent reports, the UK citizens are getting the run-a-round in CM. Consulate closed, and they have to jump through lots of hoops for a simple passport renewal...like two roundtrips to BKK. Australian consulate closed, too. This at a time when there is an ever increasing number of expats in CM, and you would think the outrageous fees they charge could pay for the facility.

For a few years now, UK passports can only be renewed in the UK so either you do it on a trip there (can easily be done in 1 day if you book an appointment in advance & is the approach I took last October) or you renew by post (which is what my mate did & it took 4 weeks from Singapore) no need to speak/engage with any "Local" embassies/consulates.

I can only assume the "2 trips to Bangkok" were because they used an agent there, complete waste of time IMHO, it doesn't come much easier than renewing your UK passport.

[Expattaff1308]

I'm from the US, but from recent reports, the UK citizens are getting the run-a-round in CM. Consulate closed, and they have to jump through lots of hoops for a simple passport renewal...like two roundtrips to BKK. Australian consulate closed, too. This at a time when there is an ever increasing number of expats in CM, and you would think the outrageous fees they charge could pay for the facility.

For a few years now, UK passports can only be renewed in the UK so either you do it on a trip there (can easily be done in 1 day if you book an appointment in advance & is the approach I took last October) or you renew by post (which is what my mate did & it took 4 weeks from Singapore) no need to speak/engage with any "Local" embassies/consulates.

I can only assume the "2 trips to Bangkok" were because they used an agent there, complete waste of time IMHO, it doesn't come much easier than renewing your UK passport.

Its changed twice since Singapore, first direct to Liverpool and now to the Trendy building in Bangkok there has been a number of posts on it.

[JB300]

I'm from the US, but from recent reports, the UK citizens are getting the run-a-round in CM. Consulate closed, and they have to jump through lots of hoops for a simple passport renewal...like two roundtrips to BKK. Australian consulate closed, too. This at a time when there is an ever increasing number of expats in CM, and you would think the outrageous fees they charge could pay for the facility.

For a few years now, UK passports can only be renewed in the UK so either you do it on a trip there (can easily be done in 1 day if you book an appointment in advance & is the approach I took last October) or you renew by post (which is what my mate did & it took 4 weeks from Singapore) no need to speak/engage with any "Local" embassies/consulates.

I can only assume the "2 trips to Bangkok" were because they used an agent there, complete waste of time IMHO, it doesn't come much easier than renewing your UK passport.

Its changed twice since Singapore, first direct to Liverpool and now to the Trendy building in Bangkok there has been a number of posts on it.

My experience is from September last year (& it had changed from a number of different countries to a regional hub in Hong Kong for the previous passport renewal), has it changed since then? Surely applying by post is just that no matter where you are.

Sorry, I've wandered off topic (again) so might as well add another OT subject (that we do touch on in this thread), I see the UK govt has done a U-Turn on "Free" NHS for Expats... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/expat-health/11633938/Government-U-turn-on-NHS-access-for-expats.html

Edited August 28, 2015 by JB300

[Expattaff1308]

I'm from the US, but from recent reports, the UK citizens are getting the run-a-round in CM. Consulate closed, and they have to jump through lots of hoops for a simple passport renewal...like two roundtrips to BKK. Australian consulate closed, too. This at a time when there is an ever increasing number of expats in CM, and you would think the outrageous fees they charge could pay for the facility.

For a few years now, UK passports can only be renewed in the UK so either you do it on a trip there (can easily be done in 1 day if you book an appointment in advance & is the approach I took last October) or you renew by post (which is what my mate did & it took 4 weeks from Singapore) no need to speak/engage with any "Local" embassies/consulates.

I can only assume the "2 trips to Bangkok" were because they used an agent there, complete waste of time IMHO, it doesn't come much easier than renewing your UK passport.

Its changed twice since Singapore, first direct to Liverpool and now to the Trendy building in Bangkok there has been a number of posts on it.

My experience is from September last year (& it had changed from a number of different countries to a regional hub in Hong Kong for the previous passport renewal), has it changed since then? Surely applying by post is just that no matter where you are.

Sorry, I've wandered off topic (again) so might as well add another OT subject (that we do touch on in this thread), I see the UK govt has done a U-Turn on "Free" NHS for Expats... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/expat-health/11633938/Government-U-turn-on-NHS-access-for-expats.html

Theres many posts on the renewing of UK Passports but via The Trendy Building in BKK is the latest..

As for the NHS, we are just an easy target.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Expattaff1308

[nong38]

Whilst we have strayed slightly off here I will just add my twopenth. I renewed this year on my ceremonial visit back to the UK, did it through the Post Office service and it was back in 5 days, just a word here, the old one is sent back seperately 2nd class and thats the one with your re entry permit and visa in it, it turned up 3 days later.