UK Pensions

CO-CO said:
A good, comprehensive summary of the benefits available to UK resident pensioners.

Simply playing devil's advocate here but, as a UK politician, I would reword your final sentence to read "geographical location of choice".

We make our bed, we lie in it.
Continuing the bedroom theme - in 2006 when (as @FERRET might say) I was balls deep into a soi 6 bar girl, and thinking that Thailand might be a nice place to live, the last thing on my mind was frozen pensions.

Frozen pensions are unfair simply because of the basis on which they were designed. Although classed as a benefit they are effectively an entitlement because you have to contribute into NIC's to qualify.......no adjustment to contributions was made for location - so why would should a freeze be placed on pension payments?

Frozen pensions are a soft target for politicians and there is little public sympathy within the UK for the 'plight' of the ex-pat pensioner who has chosen to swan off to the sun in his twilight years.
Click to expand...
I honestly believe that rather than there being little sympathy within the UK for our situation, the reality is that there is very little awareness among the UK public for the plight.

It is one of those situations where, if you know about it, you are aware, but if you do not know where to find the information (as in the case of most UK residents in the UK) then there is no reason for you to suspect that UK expates here in Thailand are treated any differently to any other UK pensioners - irrespective of whether they live in the UK or any other country. It is that lack of awareness that leaves us with the material disadvantage (that the situation hasn't changed for 70 years is a complete red herring, and remains punitive and grossly inequitable.)

When the UK State Pension was say £50 a week (not all that long ago though) a fairly typical 3% annual increase was a "mere" £1.50, and would seem to make only a small diference to a retired expat here. Contrast that with the UK State Pension increases for 2023/4 and 2024/5 which total 19.47% over the two years, or £36.05 per week, and £1,875 per annum. The gap becomes bigger, faster, and the rate of inflation here makes an additional and substantial difference to our so-called Golden Years.

Do YOUR family and friends in the UK know that this semi-legalised deception continues? If they do, why don't they sign the several petitions against it, and if they don't know, shouldn't they be made aware of it by us all?

Incidentally, some might feel that "swanning off to the sun" is a rather derogatory term, and something that folk of reduced means are unlikely to be able to afford. Many older expats chose to come here for the lower cost of living compared to the UK where affordability for many is a real issue.
Collins Dictionary states that:
"If you describe someone as swanning around or swanning off, you mean that they go and have fun, rather than working or taking care of their responsibilities.
[British, informal]
She spends her time swanning around the world. [VERB preposition/adverb]
The mother was widowed and had swanned off. [VERB preposition/adverb]
 
Last edited:
Do you really think I am going to ask my friends and relatives to sign a petition in favour of expat pension increases?

I would be too embarrassed.

It is totally legal and no one deceived me. I would be inclined to choose my words more carefully if I was embarking on a pointless crusade.
 
While you are perfectly entitled to make your personal choice in that matter, not everyone has that luxury.

Whether or not the Treasury is acting withing the spirit of the Law relating to the freezing of the state pension depends very much on the original purpose of its introduction which was to ensure that - after a working lifetime - people were not faced with poverty for their remaining years. It seems that successive governments have forgotten that principle for a selected group who in retirement face a real reduction in their standard of living, the diametric opposite of the purpose - and which is not applied to others who have contributed to the same compulsory scheme of contributions.

Every "crusade" would be pointless if no-one participated.
 
Merlin said:
While you are perfectly entitled to make your personal choice in that matter, not everyone has that luxury.

Whether or not the Treasury is acting withing the spirit of the Law relating to the freezing of the state pension depends very much on the original purpose of its introduction which was to ensure that - after a working lifetime - people were not faced with poverty for their remaining years. It seems that successive governments have forgotten that principle for a selected group who in retirement face a real reduction in their standard of living, the diametric opposite of the purpose - and which is not applied to others who have contributed to the same compulsory scheme of contributions.

Every "crusade" would be pointless if no-one participated.
Click to expand...

Crusaders often overlook the need for self accountability.

Making myself non-reliant on the state pension (so it could actually be treated as a luxury) was no luxury - I worked f**king hard to achieve.
 
I am not from the UK but watch the UK pension with interest.
I still don't understand why a UK expat living in the Philippines gets the increments but if you are in Thailand.
You don't get it.
 
CO-CO said:
Crusaders often overlook the need for self accountability.

Making myself non-reliant on the state pension (so it could actually be treated as a luxury) was no luxury - I worked f**king hard to achieve.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I worked 18 hour days in order to provide my family with the best lifestyle I could afford. My ex-wife was an accountant who had previously advised me to cash-in pensions (while she kepy hers of course) and there is now a huge gulf between our respective retirement situations. I may have been naive to take her earlier advice, and there was no recovering from it.

All animals may be born equal, but some are more equal than others.

""All that year the animals worked like slaves. But they were happy in their work; they grudged no effort or sacrifice, well aware that everything they did was for the benefit of themselves and those of their kind who would come after them, and not for a pack of idle, thieving human beings."
 
Merlin said:
FWIW, I worked 18 hour days in order to provide my family with the best lifestyle I could afford. My ex-wife was an accountant who had previously advised me to cash-in pensions (while she kepy hers of course) and there is now a huge gulf between our respective retirement situations. I may have been naive to take her earlier advice, and there was no recovering from it.

All animals may be born equal, but some are more equal than others.

""All that year the animals worked like slaves. But they were happy in their work; they grudged no effort or sacrifice, well aware that everything they did was for the benefit of themselves and those of their kind who would come after them, and not for a pack of idle, thieving human beings."
Click to expand...

I am fortunate to have been employed in an industry where we had a 20% non-contributory pension scheme. I also realised that when I left the industry, to start my own business, I was saying goodbye to the highest 12 years of income earning plus the loss of circa £200k going into my pension pot. That said, I avoided the likelihood of a heart attack in my 50's by moving out of banking.

It is hard to think about the need for pension provision when you are in your 20's, 30's or even 40's. My early financial planning did not include the impact of two divorces.
 
CO-CO said:
I am fortunate to have been employed in an industry where we had a 20% non-contributory pension scheme. I also realised that when I left the industry, to start my own business, I was saying goodbye to the highest 12 years of income earning plus the loss of circa £200k going into my pension pot. That said, I avoided the likelihood of a heart attack in my 50's by moving out of banking.

It is hard to think about the need for pension provision when you are in your 20's, 30's or even 40's. My early financial planning did not include the impact of two divorces.
Click to expand...
That is all as if I wrote it!!!!
SNAP!
 
Ivor the Engine said:
That is all as if I wrote it!!!!
SNAP!
Click to expand...
I am in the same boat. Came here at 42 and lost a lot of pension, but no regrets. From a younger age (with connections) I was being groomed for the top position in the management of my Insurance Company where I worked, (General Accident - AVIVA now - the UK's biggest) but decided to do what I wanted and came to Thailand.

Had I stayed, would probably have died many years ago, from stress or something similar and never benefited from the better pension pot. Unlike many farangs I have made more than adequate provision for my wife and kids when I go.

I'll drink to that with another Jamesons, and hope to do so for the next 10+ years

Life is good
 
Prakhonchai Nick said:
I am in the same boat. Came here at 42 and lost a lot of pension, but no regrets. From a younger age (with connections) I was being groomed for the top position in the management of my Insurance Company where I worked, (General Accident - AVIVA now - the UK's biggest) but decided to do what I wanted and came to Thailand.

Had I stayed, would probably have died many years ago, from stress or something similar and never benefited from the better pension pot. Unlike many farangs I have made more than adequate provision for my wife and kids when I go.

I'll drink to that with another Jamesons, and hope to do so for the next 10+ years

Life is good
Click to expand...

You touch on something there that is close to our hearts; no, not the Jameson's :) ...... 'adequate provision'.....

We have seen far too many occasions where the deceased Farang has done little, or nothing, to make such provision. In many instances there is nothing available because the Farang has squandered whatever money he had. In many cases the Farang had lived effectively rent free for many years in his teerak's house but treated her as a pauper, spending 'his' money on himself. I accept that many also sell up in their home country and build a nice house for their loved ones - thereby making provision for them in that way.

I recently became frustrated with a friend who had done nothing to make future provision for his Thai Gf. In his case he has a decent occupational pension that included a widow's benefit. This can usually only go to a nominated partner so it is not money that can go to, say, the family. I estimated it be worth circa 1,000,000 Baht p.a. to her! All that was required was completion of a nomination form.

I do understand that some people find it difficult to talk about death (one foot in the grave and all that nonsense) and it took the premature death of his younger brother to galvanise him into doing something. He has now submitted a nomination form....

Nick and I have often mused over the number of 'lost' widow's pensions there must have been in Thailand - usually as a result of ignorance on the part of the Farang. Almost anyone who has an occupational pension has this widow's pension within their gift.
 
The availability of a widow's pension is subject to the rules of the pension scheme, the potential for nomination, and to the point in time where any such nomination is made.

Occupational pension schemes, whether they are defined benefit schemes or defined contribution schemes, normally require the nomination of a beneficiary to receive a widow(er)'s pension before the pension holder retires, and almost certainly before the holder dies. The same applies to personal pension schemes.

Benefits under a money purchase (defined contribution) scheme depend on the value of the accrued pension pot, and actuaries determine how much money is available for distribution: a) per annum in retirement, guaranteed usually for a minimum of 5 years and, b) how much is available for a pension that rises by 3-5% per annum (which will inevitably be a smaller amout than if the pension was to remain fixed for the lifetime of the holder.) Where the owner wishes his pension to continue being paid to a spouse after his own death, there will be a further "actuarial reduction" made so that the pension payments will continue for longer, albeit (typically) at 50% of the owner's own pension rate. Where that too might need to be increased in payment each year, there will be a further actuarial reduction.

As an example, I was single when I decided to retire from one money purchase scheme. I was 60 years old then, and had no intention at the time of remarrying. As with most people, I had little idea of the age at which I might die, so I opted to take the maximum available pension - without annual increases - for as long as I lived, knowing that the pension would die with me. The calculations I requested showed that I would receive £X per annum for a level pension, or a much lesser sum each year if I chose a pension increasing by 3% per annum. In fact, I would have needed to live until I was 92 years old (unlikely?) to receive the same total amount of money that I would have received by taking a level pension at the outset.

I didn't need to consider the possibility of remarrying, but ended up getting hitched again at the age of 65 yrs, by which time I'd received 5 years worth of payments, and there was no option to add my new spouse to the pension benefit, nor to increase the payments in retirement by 3% to allow for her being likely to live well beyond my 92nd birthday.

The point of the above is to recommend that anyone who hasn't yet selected his options for retirement at a specific age, or with a pension that increases annually in payment, or provides for a widow's pension gets on with doing so without delay. Tempus fugit!
 
Merlin said:
The availability of a widow's pension is subject to the rules of the pension scheme, the potential for nomination, and to the point in time where any such nomination is made.

Occupational pension schemes, whether they are defined benefit schemes or defined contribution schemes, normally require the nomination of a beneficiary to receive a widow(er)'s pension before the pension holder retires, and almost certainly before the holder dies. The same applies to personal pension schemes.

Benefits under a money purchase (defined contribution) scheme depend on the value of the accrued pension pot, and actuaries determine how much money is available for distribution: a) per annum in retirement, guaranteed usually for a minimum of 5 years and, b) how much is available for a pension that rises by 3-5% per annum (which will inevitably be a smaller amout than if the pension was to remain fixed for the lifetime of the holder.) Where the owner wishes his pension to continue being paid to a spouse after his own death, there will be a further "actuarial reduction" made so that the pension payments will continue for longer, albeit (typically) at 50% of the owner's own pension rate. Where that too might need to be increased in payment each year, there will be a further actuarial reduction.

As an example, I was single when I decided to retire from one money purchase scheme. I was 60 years old then, and had no intention at the time of remarrying. As with most people, I had little idea of the age at which I might die, so I opted to take the maximum available pension - without annual increases - for as long as I lived, knowing that the pension would die with me. The calculations I requested showed that I would receive £X per annum for a level pension, or a much lesser sum each year if I chose a pension increasing by 3% per annum. In fact, I would have needed to live until I was 92 years old (unlikely?) to receive the same total amount of money that I would have received by taking a level pension at the outset.

I didn't need to consider the possibility of remarrying, but ended up getting hitched again at the age of 65 yrs, by which time I'd received 5 years worth of payments, and there was no option to add my new spouse to the pension benefit, nor to increase the payments in retirement by 3% to allow for her being likely to live well beyond my 92nd birthday.

The point of the above is to recommend that anyone who hasn't yet selected his options for retirement at a specific age, or with a pension that increases annually in payment, or provides for a widow's pension gets on with doing so without delay. Tempus fugit!
Click to expand...

You will understand Rob that few expats in Thailand have your depth of knowledge on the subject.

Reading your comprehensive explanation would probably put me off exploring matters further (without any social profiling but assuming I was a blue collar worker, for example). There is a natural tendency for those not involved in the industry to stick their heads in the sand and not get involved in the details of pensions.

The most salient point (as you concluded) is "get your finger out" and if you are in an occupational scheme check to see if you there is a widow's benefit attached - then get nominating...

HSBC make it easy and I can nominate/change nomination via the pension fund app (listen to me sounding all IT knowledgeable....it is so easy a plumber could do it - no offence @Ivor the Engine :) ).
 
CO-CO said:
You will understand Rob that few expats in Thailand have your depth of knowledge on the subject.

Reading your comprehensive explanation would probably put me off exploring matters further (without any social profiling but assuming I was a blue collar worker, for example). There is a natural tendency for those not involved in the industry to stick their heads in the sand and not get involved in the details of pensions.

The most salient point (as you concluded) is "get your finger out" and if you are in an occupational scheme check to see if you there is a widow's benefit attached - then get nominating...

HSBC make it easy and I can nominate/change nomination via the pension fund app (listen to me sounding all IT knowledgeable....it is so easy a plumber could do it - no offence @Ivor the Engine :) ).
Click to expand...
555. Got to find a prospective widow, first!!!
I have got the nomination form here, awaiting for a suitable person to 'hit the jackpot' !
 
Ivor the Engine said:
555. Got to find a prospective widow, first!!!
I have got the nomination form here, awaiting for a suitable person to 'hit the jackpot' !
Click to expand...

Why not have some fun... :cool:

I understand you can revise your nominated spouse at anytime that you wish and as many times as you want prior to a final clog-popping. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top