Rise In British Men Marrying Thai Brides Behind Foreign Pensions Increase, U K Govt Suggests

[bikerider21]

Health care is free for everyone living in the UK, it is not a benefit for those paying tax and NI in the UK but living abroad.

So you can't include that as a benefit of NI contribution, because if you live abroad, you aren't entitled.

3 months outside the UK, and you are out of the NHS, no matter what NI and tax you pay.

Have you seen the Movie Sicko?

Sicko is a 2007 documentary film by American filmmaker Michael Moore.

The film investigates health care in the United States, focusing on its

health insurance and the pharmaceutical industry.

It shows a bunch of very satisfied Americans who had free operations and free medical treatment. How come?

[F4UCorsair]

The Aussie government pays absolutely nothing, not even thier own citizens who have retired abroad get the pension. My father came over for a 10 day holiday and his aussie pension was cut off because he left the country. Social Security is linked to immigration and they know the minute you step out of the country and pow you are on your own. They even know when you take a dump and how long it took you.

So for all the unbelievers with there heads in the sand or in denial, it looks like Ausy and the NZ are way ahead of the game with stopping benifits for none residents. It is just a matter of time b4 the axe falls in your own homelands

That is not true.

When the $900 gift was paid during the GFC, a third of those receiving it were living overseas, a lot of former migrants who had returned to their homelands. To qualify, they had to be on an aged pension or working and below a certain income level. There are tens of thousands of Greeks (particularly), who worked here for 30+ years and went back home to retire who are recipients of the aged pension.

Edited May 9, 2013 by F4UCorsair

[BobHG46]

So the UK government would prefer British nationals to remain in the country and be a burden to the state?

[Commander Tamson]

This is called passing the buck for their xxxx up in earlier years,

also many Brits married to Philippino women and other Europeans too not only Thais

The uk govt made the mistake of opening its borders to allow unskilled eu workers into the country, these unskilled workers bring in their families and find that they are entitled to claim benefits because they are low earners,, whilst the majority of uk unemployed find that they are better off on benefits so stay there,,, now the purse strings are getting tighter,

I'm not one for claiming benefits whilst I'm still in employment and at this time don't need it, but those idiots running the country grind my teeth,

I just wonder exactly how much I've paid in NICs in my working life to date as I've been paying at the higher rate of NICs for 28 years,

the govt would have been better keeping out the unskilled eu workforce and instead should have better controlled payment of benefits to the unemployed and checks on their job seeking

WORD OF POSSIBLE ADVICE JOHNNY!:

If you have been working abroad for 28yrs and paying top rate (Class 1) NI stamps - then you are entitled to a rebate. Write to the pensions people at Benton Newcastle upon Tyne (address on the web) and ask for a breakdown of your payments. You may have paid enough to pay for a full set of Class 3 stamps and receive a full UK pension at 65 and a rebate. I received this after discovering I'd been paying full Class 1 stamps whilst working in Portugal for 8 years. It was only discovered when I moved to Sing in 2007, then retired here early last year. Maybe good advice for some others also.

[Spalpeen]

So the UK government would prefer British nationals to remain in the country and be a burden to the state?

Rational thinking is not normally a feature of government.

[bobl]

So the UK government would prefer British nationals to remain in the country and be a burden to the state?

Yes and no.

They'd prefer they stay in the country, and kill themselves.

(look up Baroness Warnock's latest rant - I posted a link to it yesterday)

[billd766]

It always stuck in my mind that sucessive governments have said that everyone will have to provide more for their own retirement. Before I officially retired I wrote to the DWP to find out if I quallified for a full pension. I had worked for 10yrs in The USA, and paid UK NI contributions whilst working there.I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the rules had changed, and 30yrs payments ment that I had sufficient contributions, actually I had 33yrs, for a retirement age of 65yrs.So I started to draw down on my private pensions and moved here. Things started to go rapidly downhill a couple of years later when I received a letter from the DWP stating my retirement age had been 'recalculated' to 66yr 10mth. Then recently I have learnt that to Qualify for a FULL pension I will have to have 35yrs contributions. It seems that the goalposts are eturnally moving.I think that trusting ANY government will only result in grief, and unsurprisingly. I feel somewhat cheated and lied to. Although I don't agree with all the UKIP's manifesto, I can understand why they did so well in the recent local elections. So at the grand old age of 59, should I return with my various medical problems, making me virtually unemployable and become a burden on the state, just to get the NI cons paid for another couple of years? Should I also take with me my Thai wife? At the moment I can pass the income test, but who knows, that too may change shortly. I can play the system as well as any johnny foreigner, and it would cost the state a lot more to keep me there than pay an indexed linked pension eventually, if ever.

If you are only short of a couple of years of contributions you would probably be advised to looking into wether you can make back dated contributions or not, this does not mean you have to return to the UK to acheive this.

Contact the DWP & see what they have to say.

I am currently investigating this situation myself, but for my wife we live in the UK & she my be short a couple of years contributions due to the new figure of 35 years, I do know we can make 6 years back payments if we need to which would be a little under £14 a week for an employee a lot less for other catagories.

When I was working I needed and had 44 years NI contributions. That was then dropped to 30 a few years ago and looks like it is on the way back up again.

I worked 50 years both in the UK and offshore however my son in the UK is now 35 and currently he will have to work 52 years for his state pension or more likely 55 or 56 by the time he retires.

This also assumes that ALL companies will employ staff in their 50s, 60s and perhaps 70s.

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

Indeed, as previously explained here.

Although the government never said that an individual's NI contributions would be invested for their exclusive benefit; so I don't see where fraud comes into it.

A private pension scheme provider,would most certainly be barred from operating a pension scheme with no investment and growth facility,so it's a pay in and pay out scheme,so would it be legal and above board? I don't think so!

Yes,the government's pension scheme is a ponzi.

I don't think that was ever intended to be the case,Ponzi schemes where never even dreamt of in the mid to late late 1940s. And those that gave the British people a Pension scheme,were very unlikely to have personally profited,in those days,even petty cash had to be signed for,under a strict Civil Service Regime.

It was with the best will in the world an ill concieved scheme,designed to benefit the people of an elderly population, but hopelessly planned by todays standards,and the civil servants could not have envisaged the shortcomings which are now,some 67 years later all too obvious. ( Sigh....) Hindsight is a cure all for all past errors and omissions.

To be fair they didn't have the advantage of powerful number crunching computers and could not have predicted the exponential increase in life expectancy.

[belg]

pensions are unfair in most socialist eu countries... why not give you pension and or benefits to the percentage you really contributed? a bit like the US situation where you pay much less tax and have your 401k pension fund, you put in money of your own and you take it out when you need or retire... nothing more fair, right ?

in many eu countries, illegal or regulated illegal people get citizenship after countless manipulation in court with their free court appointed lawyers, milking the state for a lot of money ,and bringing in all their family members, uncles, grandpartens, that all get a pension, even a minimal one, without ever contributed 1 euro/pound/whatever to the system ...

here in thailand, pointless to say we don't have social welfare, pensions, even we contribute a lot, even less the even basic right of living with your family (wife/children) without the yearly begging paper contest at immigration and the 90 report to your parole officer

[rct99q]

Stop paying allowances to illegal immigrants and their extended families in UK and it will easily offset the cost of the rise in pension payments to people who paid tax and NI all their lives in the UK>

Rant over.

Or even Eastern Europeans who can turn up and start claiming benefits. Apparently Polish is now the 2nd most spoken language in the UK.

Last time I visited the UK I was surprised how many Polish people there were in my home town. My uncle, a welder, worked at a small fabrication shop. From about 20 staff, he's the last remaining brit on the payroll.

Is this a statement about how good Polish workers are or how poor Brit workers perform, I can't tell!

[rct99q]

pensions are unfair in most socialist eu countries... why not give you pension and or benefits to the percentage you really contributed? a bit like the US situation where you pay much less tax and have your 401k pension fund, you put in money of your own and you take it out when you need or retire... nothing more fair, right ?

in many eu countries, illegal or regulated illegal people get citizenship after countless manipulation in court with their free court appointed lawyers, milking the state for a lot of money ,and bringing in all their family members, uncles, grandpartens, that all get a pension, even a minimal one, without ever contributed 1 euro/pound/whatever to the system ...

here in thailand, pointless to say we don't have social welfare, pensions, even we contribute a lot, even less the even basic right of living with your family (wife/children) without the yearly begging paper contest at immigration and the 90 report to your parole officer

If you look at some of the posters replies here Thailand is doing exactly what the Uk should be doing. Making it difficult for those not qualified to live here based on their ethnic background. Be honest how many people living here (thailand) see more Polish workers in a factory than Thais? My dear old mother once worked in a factory that employed over 100 women, good solid Mansfield working class women! Today that same factory employ's mostly Irish nats...and you know how lazy they are (but will work for half the cost).

[7by7]

"... “too many foreign people who have never set foot in Britain at all are receiving UK pensions.”

But it's okay for the hundreds of thousands of immigrants who refuse to work to receive social security? Idiots...

The idiots are the people who believe the propaganda that there are hundreds of thousands of immigrants in the UK who refuse to work and yet receive social security!

I posted the rules before on what benefits non EEA immigrants can and cannot receive, basically only those they have contributed to via NI contributions until they have ILR; which takes at least 5 years to obtain.

EEA immigrants can claim more, as can British immigrants in other EEA countries, it's a two way street. But if an EEA immigrant becomes an unreasonable burden upon the state, s/he can have their permission to stay cancelled and be removed.

I also linked to Playing the blame game - it's all the immigrants fault... before, maybe you should read it.

Whipping up a storm of innuendo and misrepresentation, they link students, tourists and people ‘coming in the backs of lorries’ to the fact that 370,000 people claiming work-related social security benefits were born abroad..........

..........Of this 370,000, over one-half are actually British citizens. They didn’t arrive here yesterday – many will have come ten, twenty or more years ago, and are fully a part of British society.

Another point: 370,000 sounds like a big figure, but it represents a fraction more than 6% of the 5.5 million people in receipt of these benefits. Not such a large figure after all.

It might also be worth mentioning that people born abroad make up around 14% of the UK workforce. If they were represented in that proportion amongst benefit claimants we’d need around one million more of these ‘foreigners’ to get down to the dole queue and sign on

Edited May 9, 2013 by 7by7

[MAJIC]

@canman Answer to Post No 209

An interesting article,but Ponzi schemes are in no way comparable to the NI Contribution based National Pension scheme.For a start Ponzi contributers have a choice to voluntarily join the scheme. NI Contributers have no choice.

[Card]

@canman Answer to Post No 209

An interesting article,but Ponzi schemes are in no way comparable to the NI Contribution based National Pension scheme.For a start Ponzi contributers have a choice to voluntarily join the scheme. NI Contributers have no choice.

Can't they opt out?

[AnotherOneAmerican]

I don't think that was ever intended to be the case,Ponzi schemes where never even dreamt of in the mid to late late 1940s. And those that gave the British people a Pension scheme,were very unlikely to have personally profited,in those days,even petty cash had to be signed for,under a strict Civil Service Regime.

It was with the best will in the world an ill concieved scheme,designed to benefit the people of an elderly population, but hopelessly planned by todays standards,and the civil servants could not have envisaged the shortcomings which are now,some 67 years later all too obvious. ( Sigh....) Hindsight is a cure all for all past errors and omissions.

To be fair they didn't have the advantage of powerful number crunching computers and could not have predicted the exponential increase in life expectancy.

In 1950 UK life expectancy was 68, but don't forget this included all the people who were killed in WW1 and WW2, and high child mortality.

In 2010 it reached 78, I'm surprised the difference is so small, makes you wonder if life expectancy has increased at all (if you exclude death by war)

Edited May 9, 2013 by AnotherOneAmerican

[7by7]

Majic,

I think we are basically in agreement over the causes of the problem, are we not?

Namely that the state pension was designed at a time when the working population far outweighed the retired population. Those who designed the system had no idea, or lacked the foresight to see, that falling birth rates, off set somewhat by immigration, and better health care leading to increased longevity would drastically change this.

When this did start to become apparent, governments were too scared to do anything about it at the time, and shelved the problem for the future when it would be somebody else's problem.

Agreed?

[Card]

pensions are unfair in most socialist eu countries... why not give you pension and or benefits to the percentage you really contributed? a bit like the US situation where you pay much less tax and have your 401k pension fund, you put in money of your own and you take it out when you need or retire... nothing more fair, right ?

in many eu countries, illegal or regulated illegal people get citizenship after countless manipulation in court with their free court appointed lawyers, milking the state for a lot of money ,and bringing in all their family members, uncles, grandpartens, that all get a pension, even a minimal one, without ever contributed 1 euro/pound/whatever to the system ...

here in thailand, pointless to say we don't have social welfare, pensions, even we contribute a lot, even less the even basic right of living with your family (wife/children) without the yearly begging paper contest at immigration and the 90 report to your parole officer

If you look at some of the posters replies here Thailand is doing exactly what the Uk should be doing. Making it difficult for those not qualified to live here based on their ethnic background. Be honest how many people living here (thailand) see more Polish workers in a factory than Thais? My dear old mother once worked in a factory that employed over 100 women, good solid Mansfield working class women! Today that same factory employ's mostly Irish nats...and you know how lazy they are (but will work for half the cost).

Many, many Thai factories and building sites are manned by Burmese, Laotians and Cambodians, including children. probably in a greater proportion than Poles in UK factories and building sites. Most are illegal but are tolerated because they are cheaper and work harder than Thais because they are more desperate. It's the same workers that make goods cheaper when YOU go shopping in Thailand or buy or rent your home. Edited May 9, 2013 by Card

[7by7]

@canman Answer to Post No 209

An interesting article,but Ponzi schemes are in no way comparable to the NI Contribution based National Pension scheme.For a start Ponzi contributers have a choice to voluntarily join the scheme. NI Contributers have no choice.

Can't they opt out?

No.

NI contributions are mandatory for all those earning above a set minimum income.

[Waterloo]

@canman Answer to Post No 209

An interesting article,but Ponzi schemes are in no way comparable to the NI Contribution based National Pension scheme.For a start Ponzi contributers have a choice to voluntarily join the scheme. NI Contributers have no choice.

Can't they opt out?

No.

NI contributions are mandatory for all those earning above a set minimum income.

I think he is confused with when you could contract out of AVC's

[Waterloo]

@canman Answer to Post No 209

An interesting article,but Ponzi schemes are in no way comparable to the NI Contribution based National Pension scheme.For a start Ponzi contributers have a choice to voluntarily join the scheme. NI Contributers have no choice.

Can't they opt out?

No.

NI contributions are mandatory for all those earning above a set minimum income.

I think he is confused with when you could contract out of AVC's

Sorry should have said contracted out of SERP's

[7by7]

Yes, AVCs were (still are?) Additional Voluntary Contributions which you could (still can?) make over and above your mandatory contributions should you wish make up for contributions you may have missed previously for some reason.

Even those who did contract out of SERPS still had to pay the same amount into a private pension of their choice.

In fact, it was still deducted by their employer together with their main NIC, paid to what was then the DHSS, who then passed the SERPS bit onto the private pension provider.

[MAJIC]

Majic,

I think we are basically in agreement over the causes of the problem, are we not?

Namely that the state pension was designed at a time when the working population far outweighed the retired population. Those who designed the system had no idea, or lacked the foresight to see, that falling birth rates, off set somewhat by immigration, and better health care leading to increased longevity would drastically change this.

When this did start to become apparent, governments were too scared to do anything about it at the time, and shelved the problem for the future when it would be somebody else's problem.

Agreed?

Yes! Agreed,there is not much difference in our respective viewpoints.

Of course setting up the scheme in 1946 under Pre Computer Technology days,was no easy feat for the Cival Servants,actually while researching this Topic,I came across the link below,it seems Politicians have not been totally inactive or ignoring the Pension scheme completely.

Even so it could certainly be argued that much more could have been done over at least the past 6 Decades,and had the Politicians let all, or part of NI Pension funds into Private Companies Management,especially from the early Seventies onwards,we would not now be seeing the obvious shortfall in future pensions,and have the younger NI Contributers accuse the Baby Boomers of raping the Countries finances(even though the Baby Boomers built up their own wealth, with hard work ),and leaving them nothing,but that's with the benefit of hindsight, as usual.

http://www.opalliance.org.uk/penhistory.htm

[MAJIC]

It always stuck in my mind that sucessive governments have said that everyone will have to provide more for their own retirement. Before I officially retired I wrote to the DWP to find out if I quallified for a full pension. I had worked for 10yrs in The USA, and paid UK NI contributions whilst working there.I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the rules had changed, and 30yrs payments ment that I had sufficient contributions, actually I had 33yrs, for a retirement age of 65yrs.So I started to draw down on my private pensions and moved here. Things started to go rapidly downhill a couple of years later when I received a letter from the DWP stating my retirement age had been 'recalculated' to 66yr 10mth. Then recently I have learnt that to Qualify for a FULL pension I will have to have 35yrs contributions. It seems that the goalposts are eturnally moving.I think that trusting ANY government will only result in grief, and unsurprisingly. I feel somewhat cheated and lied to. Although I don't agree with all the UKIP's manifesto, I can understand why they did so well in the recent local elections. So at the grand old age of 59, should I return with my various medical problems, making me virtually unemployable and become a burden on the state, just to get the NI cons paid for another couple of years? Should I also take with me my Thai wife? At the moment I can pass the income test, but who knows, that too may change shortly. I can play the system as well as any johnny foreigner, and it would cost the state a lot more to keep me there than pay an indexed linked pension eventually, if ever.

The change of Qualifying age (66 yrs & 10 mths,your figures) would have happened anyway,at least now you will not have to pay in NI Contributions of 44 years for a full pension,because as you say it's only 35 years to qualify for the maximum pension,even though I understand that is small comfort to you now.

Edited May 9, 2013 by MAJIC

[Card]

It always stuck in my mind that sucessive governments have said that everyone will have to provide more for their own retirement. Before I officially retired I wrote to the DWP to find out if I quallified for a full pension. I had worked for 10yrs in The USA, and paid UK NI contributions whilst working there.I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the rules had changed, and 30yrs payments ment that I had sufficient contributions, actually I had 33yrs, for a retirement age of 65yrs.So I started to draw down on my private pensions and moved here. Things started to go rapidly downhill a couple of years later when I received a letter from the DWP stating my retirement age had been 'recalculated' to 66yr 10mth. Then recently I have learnt that to Qualify for a FULL pension I will have to have 35yrs contributions. It seems that the goalposts are eturnally moving.I think that trusting ANY government will only result in grief, and unsurprisingly. I feel somewhat cheated and lied to. Although I don't agree with all the UKIP's manifesto, I can understand why they did so well in the recent local elections. So at the grand old age of 59, should I return with my various medical problems, making me virtually unemployable and become a burden on the state, just to get the NI cons paid for another couple of years? Should I also take with me my Thai wife? At the moment I can pass the income test, but who knows, that too may change shortly. I can play the system as well as any johnny foreigner, and it would cost the state a lot more to keep me there than pay an indexed linked pension eventually, if ever.

If you are only short of a couple of years of contributions you would probably be advised to looking into wether you can make back dated contributions or not, this does not mean you have to return to the UK to acheive this.

Contact the DWP & see what they have to say.

I am currently investigating this situation myself, but for my wife we live in the UK & she my be short a couple of years contributions due to the new figure of 35 years, I do know we can make 6 years back payments if we need to which would be a little under £14 a week for an employee a lot less for other catagories.

When I was working I needed and had 44 years NI contributions. That was then dropped to 30 a few years ago and looks like it is on the way back up again.

I worked 50 years both in the UK and offshore however my son in the UK is now 35 and currently he will have to work 52 years for his state pension or more likely 55 or 56 by the time he retires.

This also assumes that ALL companies will employ staff in their 50s, 60s and perhaps 70s.

I don't know where u guys get your figures from.

4u2mad - you can still retire at around 65 years and need only 30 years of NI contributions.

And Billd766 - your son's calculation seems way out. Why don't you look at the UK government's pension calculator at https://www.gov.uk/calculate-state-pension

Or am I missing something?

Edited May 10, 2013 by Card

[billd766]

It always stuck in my mind that sucessive governments have said that everyone will have to provide more for their own retirement. Before I officially retired I wrote to the DWP to find out if I quallified for a full pension. I had worked for 10yrs in The USA, and paid UK NI contributions whilst working there.I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the rules had changed, and 30yrs payments ment that I had sufficient contributions, actually I had 33yrs, for a retirement age of 65yrs.So I started to draw down on my private pensions and moved here. Things started to go rapidly downhill a couple of years later when I received a letter from the DWP stating my retirement age had been 'recalculated' to 66yr 10mth. Then recently I have learnt that to Qualify for a FULL pension I will have to have 35yrs contributions. It seems that the goalposts are eturnally moving.I think that trusting ANY government will only result in grief, and unsurprisingly. I feel somewhat cheated and lied to. Although I don't agree with all the UKIP's manifesto, I can understand why they did so well in the recent local elections. So at the grand old age of 59, should I return with my various medical problems, making me virtually unemployable and become a burden on the state, just to get the NI cons paid for another couple of years? Should I also take with me my Thai wife? At the moment I can pass the income test, but who knows, that too may change shortly. I can play the system as well as any johnny foreigner, and it would cost the state a lot more to keep me there than pay an indexed linked pension eventually, if ever.

If you are only short of a couple of years of contributions you would probably be advised to looking into wether you can make back dated contributions or not, this does not mean you have to return to the UK to acheive this.

Contact the DWP & see what they have to say.

I am currently investigating this situation myself, but for my wife we live in the UK & she my be short a couple of years contributions due to the new figure of 35 years, I do know we can make 6 years back payments if we need to which would be a little under £14 a week for an employee a lot less for other catagories.

When I was working I needed and had 44 years NI contributions. That was then dropped to 30 a few years ago and looks like it is on the way back up again.

I worked 50 years both in the UK and offshore however my son in the UK is now 35 and currently he will have to work 52 years for his state pension or more likely 55 or 56 by the time he retires.

This also assumes that ALL companies will employ staff in their 50s, 60s and perhaps 70s.

I don't know where u guys get your figures from.

4u2mad - you can still retire at around 65 years and need only 30 years of NI contributions.

And Billd766 - your son's calculation seems way out. Why don't you look at the UK government's pension calculator at https://www.gov.uk/calculate-state-pension

Or am I missing something?

State Pension age

Retirement age is not the same as State Pension age which can be

between 61 and 68, depending when someone was born and if they’re male

or female. Anyone can carry on working past State Pension age.

https://www.gov.uk/retirement-age

I started work at 15 AND I was paying tax plus NIC.

The retirement age for a state pension them was 65. However as the governments of the day have us over a barrel they can change the rules as and when they like for a state pension starting age and amount. NIC are compulsory and you cannot opt out of them and they WILL keep increasing.

My son was working part time before he was 18 as was permitted under the law AND paying NIC. If he does not receive the state pension until he is 68 (if the age limit has not gone up by then he will have worked part and full time for at least 49 years assuming he still HAS a job at that age.

My father and his generation worked from about 13 until 65, my mother was 1/2 a generation later and worked until she was about 50 and could work no longer due to illness. They both died at 69 some 15 years apart. Statistically I will die within a year as I become 69 in a couple of weeks. I hope however to last another 10 to 15 years to see my Thai son grow up and also to hear about my grandson in the UK who was 2 last month.

As for my personal feelings on most politicians in most countries is simple.

A pox on all of them and may the fleas of a million camels infest them and all their families for a thousand generations.

[Card]

don't know where u guys get your figures from.

It always stuck in my mind that sucessive governments have said that everyone will have to provide more for their own retirement. Before I officially retired I wrote to the DWP to find out if I quallified for a full pension. I had worked for 10yrs in The USA, and paid UK NI contributions whilst working there.I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the rules had changed, and 30yrs payments ment that I had sufficient contributions, actually I had 33yrs, for a retirement age of 65yrs.So I started to draw down on my private pensions and moved here. Things started to go rapidly downhill a couple of years later when I received a letter from the DWP stating my retirement age had been 'recalculated' to 66yr 10mth. Then recently I have learnt that to Qualify for a FULL pension I will have to have 35yrs contributions. It seems that the goalposts are eturnally moving.I think that trusting ANY government will only result in grief, and unsurprisingly. I feel somewhat cheated and lied to. Although I don't agree with all the UKIP's manifesto, I can understand why they did so well in the recent local elections. So at the grand old age of 59, should I return with my various medical problems, making me virtually unemployable and become a burden on the state, just to get the NI cons paid for another couple of years? Should I also take with me my Thai wife? At the moment I can pass the income test, but who knows, that too may change shortly. I can play the system as well as any johnny foreigner, and it would cost the state a lot more to keep me there than pay an indexed linked pension eventually, if ever.

If you are only short of a couple of years of contributions you would probably be advised to looking into wether you can make back dated contributions or not, this does not mean you have to return to the UK to acheive this.

Contact the DWP & see what they have to say.

I am currently investigating this situation myself, but for my wife we live in the UK & she my be short a couple of years contributions due to the new figure of 35 years, I do know we can make 6 years back payments if we need to which would be a little under £14 a week for an employee a lot less for other catagories.

When I was working I needed and had 44 years NI contributions. That was then dropped to 30 a few years ago and looks like it is on the way back up again.

I worked 50 years both in the UK and offshore however my son in the UK is now 35 and currently he will have to work 52 years for his state pension or more likely 55 or 56 by the time he retires.

This also assumes that ALL companies will employ staff in their 50s, 60s and perhaps 70s.

4u2mad - you can still retire at around 65 years and need only 30 years of NI contributions.

And Billd766 - your son's calculation seems way out. Why don't you look at the UK government's pension calculator at https://www.gov.uk/calculate-state-pension

Or am I missing something?

State Pension age

Retirement age is not the same as State Pension age which can be

between 61 and 68, depending when someone was born and if they’re male

or female. Anyone can carry on working past State Pension age.

https://www.gov.uk/retirement-age

I started work at 15 AND I was paying tax plus NIC.

The retirement age for a state pension them was 65. However as the governments of the day have us over a barrel they can change the rules as and when they like for a state pension starting age and amount. NIC are compulsory and you cannot opt out of them and they WILL keep increasing.

My son was working part time before he was 18 as was permitted under the law AND paying NIC. If he does not receive the state pension until he is 68 (if the age limit has not gone up by then he will have worked part and full time for at least 49 years assuming he still HAS a job at that age.

My father and his generation worked from about 13 until 65, my mother was 1/2 a generation later and worked until she was about 50 and could work no longer due to illness. They both died at 69 some 15 years apart. Statistically I will die within a year as I become 69 in a couple of weeks. I hope however to last another 10 to 15 years to see my Thai son grow up and also to hear about my grandson in the UK who was 2 last month.

As for my personal feelings on most politicians in most countries is simple.

A pox on all of them and may the fleas of a million camels infest them and all their families for a thousand generations.

I am still confused - what does the website I gave you tell you about your pension/retirement age and that of your son's in relation to your contributions, sex and age and why does what you say differ from that?

[billd766]

RE card post 236

Sorry just too many quotes.

I don't need to know my pension/retirement age as I have been retired for 4 years now less 13 days.

As for my son's retiremant and pension age I would have better luck predicting the lottery numbers.

Two successive UK governments have changed the rules in about 5 years.

https://www.gov.uk/retirement-age

I got this link through Google. Is it right or wrong? ask the uk government, they wrote it.

As my son has at least 30 to 32 years to go under the current rules who can say what it will be in 5,10, 20 or 30 years time?

I used to vote Tory but that was a long time ago, now I would be just as happy if a soi dog were in parliament. My apologies to all soi dogs who would have to lower their status just to get there.

[Bagwan]

why should a foreign wife watever nationallity,get a uk pension if shes never paid a penny in the uk,and moreover wont go there,and spend it in uk,its wrong and you know it,,about time the gravy train stopped

I don't know it's wrong, and my opinion is shared by many. You are arguing that I should marry a UK girl or else the Government should financially penalise me? That I and my wife should be penalised because after a blameless life, including a long engagement in the Armed Forces, and working hard to better myself and to increase my income that I should be confined to a country slowly submerging into mediocrity? How many billions are being spent on 2 aircraft carriers that will never justify their building and running costs? The UK is not a World power any more and should stop acting as if it is and spending priorities should be re-examined. Guaranteeing the freedom of the citizens of Europe (and I include those of Germany in that number) cost the UK dear and the country has never really recovered from that. Now the UK Government is spending money to house, clothe and feed people from those countries - and others who voted to run their countries their way - and failed. They have made their own beds and should be left to lie in them.

This move may well disturb the tranquility of my fading years and I despise those who support it. If only the Sale of Goods Act applied to this crap that the UK Government is selling. It seems to me that the Government is as corrupt and uncaring as the bankers that have left us all in a parlous state. I am usually not in favour of demonstrations, especially those by the great unwashed masquerading as 'students', but I sincerely hope that the mobs will take to the streets and stay there until this cruel plan is filed away in a dustbin.

[Tomtomtom69]

This post is so full of crap. Next it will be blaming people who have paid pensions for living too long. If you have paid into a pension; then you are fully entitled to what you are owed regardless. Just a shame that the government now is full of rich hi-so dipshits that have no grasp of what it is like to live like a normal person. Stop letting immigrants in with no way to fund themselves, stop foriegn aid to countries that hate us and that will save the honest tax payer more than the money quoted in the above crap.

Good point - but nowadays foreign aid to poor countries from western countries is a pittance and western countries are generally no longer funding useful infrastructure projects like they used to. China on the other hand is. I have noticed that over the last decade western funded aid projects for infrastructure purposes have all but dried up in SE Asia but China seems to fund every new road and now even a high-speed rail project to SE Asia is on the cards.

[Donnie Brasco]

Conspiracy theory.