bobd22

I suppose we all have our own perspective on this Dave. The decision to increase women's state retirement age to equal it with mens seemingly was decided upon in 1995. However it was not widely known about neither conservative or later government made most aware, although they say letters were sent out certainly my wife never got one. I can only say how it affected my wife and myself. We bought our property in Spain when my wife was 50 believing she would get her pension and therefore our rights to free health care via the S1 on her retirement. Then Gordon Brown set the timescale of change not long before labour lost the election. So that pushed her pension to around 61 and a half. Then in 2012 the conservatives changed it again to rapidly speed up the change and pushed her retirement age to 66. Ok yes she could work on to 66 and build up her pension but she already had the 35 years contributions so can't get any more just when she can draw it has changed . The point I see is these women were within 10 or less years of actually drawing their pensions at the age they were told they could get it. Suddenly they had to wait 6 more years. It certainly made a huge difference to our retirement plans.

rspltd

Unfortunately the Conservative government did know about it because they had been resisting pressure from the EU for some time but in the end they were threatened with Court. The later changes came about because of the EU Equality Act which swept up a number of other issues.

VFR

bobd22

Possible problems for government re women's pensions

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3580336.html

VFR

This comment sums it all up from your link ..............

Janxh 1 month ago
I was notified in 2013 that i would not be retiring in 2016 when i reached 60 but would have another 6 years to wait !! That was the first i knew about it. Many women my age stopped work to have children or worked part time for a few years and in the 70's, 80's & 90's pensions were not what they are today and I didn't pay into a pension for years as we were never told we would be expected to. Our contract was to pay our NHI/Tax and we would get our pension when we reached 60, now they have not only moved the goalposts they have almost removed them altogether. I will have a tiny pension of £52 a month, do not own my own home so it will not be life of luxury for me in 6 years time as some commentators below believe we will have. I am a disabled lady who has not been able to work for the last 10 years, and who according to the dwp "has multiple illnesses that are both disabling and degenerative and will not improve and work in the long term is unlikely" So now instead of retiring last year i have another 6 years to fight the hateful assessment system and constantly have to justify my inability to work, and after all i have been through thus far i don't know if i have the fight left in me.

Pulaski

This reflects on a ridiculous belief that became increasingly common on the 1960's, and probably reached a high point in the mid-late 1970's, but persists today for many people who came of age in the 1960's and 70's, that somehow money just grows on trees, that pensions just magically appear when you retire, and that it is entirely the government's responsibility to provide a pension irrespective of any contributions into the system. ..... The same applies to other "benefits".

I didn't start work until much later, but before I even received my first pay packet, a fat packet of £20's and £10's, I had worked out, with some encouragement from my father, that the government couldn't be relied on to be there, handing out cash indefinitely into the future. My working theory until a few years ago was that the British state pension (and after I moved to the US, US Social Security) would not be there when I retire, at very least because it has become means tested. And I still think that by the time I get there that may be true.

At the moment I am still paying in additional voluntary contributions towards a UK state pension because they are very modest amounts, and there is a decent likelihood that I will get something back. If I retire rich and ultimately get no UK state pension then I won't worry too much because the additional amounts I paid were small, but if I retire poor I will be glad for the extra income.

bobd22

The point for many is not as you say in my view. Many of these women have in fact contributed for the now required 35 years but the goal posts have been rapidly moved for them re at what point they can draw the pension? You seem to ignore that they effectively as we all did enter into a contract with the government pay your dues i.e. NI and you get a pension at X age. Should changes have been made due to increased life expectancy ? Yes but should that have been spread out and assessed earlier? Yes but successive governments failed to do that because politically it was not a vote winner. All of a sudden they make a huge change fail to inform the women and simply say tough you may have been a couple of years away from drawing your pension but that's the way it is! Oh and by the way we don't care. You say there is no magic money tree I am afraid I must disagree , there is if you are one of the large number that could work but chose not to thus contributing not a penny to the pot but taking the lions share out. However it is the women that were approaching retirement which was snatched from under their noses and pushed a further 6 years in that lose out. Making voluntary or any further contributions doesn't help them it simply means they pay more in to get same amount out but just have to wait longer. The real elephant in the room is given that many lazy People could but didn't work are now coming up to pension age take it from people that contributed to pay out those that didn't. That's my honest view. I personally hope these women get some comeback out of this.

spainrico

I agree with Bobd22 - women have been mugged for around 4 years+ worth of pension (by the age changing) costing them around 24,000+ pounds of lost pension income. No magic money tree - of course not until it comes to crazy projects like those dreamt up by Boris and Co...........how many millions down the drain on the Garden bridge etc.......

bobd22

Or in my wife's case just over £44,000 😤

Compounded by our hopes of retiring to Spain when she got her state pension at 60 with free health care under S1. No state pension no S1 and by the time she gets to 66 possibly no S1 as result of Brexit, so double whammy.

Rufi

Hi, I have both contributions here in Spain and the Uk, due to brexit I'm now going to pay as many voluntary contributions as I can to the Uk even though I'm working here in Spain and paying contributions, because I don't know what's going to happen to my pension in the Uk or the agreements that they will have!

Rufi

My partner and I have worked for many years paying contributions and tax, but unfortunately our future state pensions look grim. We didn't invest in private pensions as we decided to get a mortgage. Maybe We should have stayed in the UK and lived off the dole!!! Nooo that was never an option, but things must change. Having read many of the posts here things have to change!

Pulaski

If you haven't paid into the UK NI system in recent years you should be able to pay Class 2 NI contributions for at least six years in arrears, plus the current year, so seven years total. The cost is around £143-£144/yr, which works out at very slightly more than £1,000 for seven years. .... And that £1,000 buys you around £30 (7/35 × £150) per week for life after you retire, or about £1,500/yr. In other words, you only have to draw your pension for about 8 months to get back the extra voluntary contributions you paid in. By any measure that is an extraordinarily good investment, so it is hardly surprising that it is going away after this year.

The replacement appears to be Class 3 contributions at around £715/yr, which are not an extraordinary deal, but still a great one, which is more or less what the Grauniad quoted me as saying (see link in my signature below. .