Bulletguy Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 This looks like another good rant for the forum. (lol) Government announced today that changes are to be made to Incapacity Benefits with the aim of getting people back into work. Bit of a snag here. With everyone 'living longer' (an oft quoted term I find quite amusing), folk already in work needing to work longer and pay more before they can retire, IF indeed they ever will, vacancies within the workplace are becoming less. So with the work environment now filling up with ageing arthritics hobbling around on zimmer frames dragging their coffins behind them, i'm left wondering where all these jobs are suddenly going to be conjured up from? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/incapacity-benefit-changes-to-include-forced-interviews-604759.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leon Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 I agree with it as there are supposedly there are people out ther who claim incapacity who are totally fit is quite fustrating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 Whilst all for it - I hate to think of people ripping the country off - I do wonder at the cost of policing the means testing. But then we pay road tax and the cost of collecting that is horrendous compared to putting the cost onto fuel. To me, means testing can be a chance for the state to simply be nosy and give yet more power to jobsworths. But then again - we have to do something about the benefit culture the last government engendered because that is where they get their votes from. Similarly, this lot need to be aware that hacking of middle England by making a prat of yourselves by not getting the Child Benefit changes thought out BEFORE "one" opens "ones" gob would be a simply spiffing idea. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted October 11, 2010 Author Share Posted October 11, 2010 CliveH - 2010-10-11 5:17 PM Whilst all for it - I hate to think of people ripping the country off - I do wonder at the cost of policing the means testing. I haven't seen any figures yet for introducing it but it's undoubtedly going to cost an absolute fortune. What worries me about it is just where is the line drawn and who is going to 'police the police'? What about the various mental illnesses? Are companies going to be told that they must employ a percentage of mentally sick or disabled people as used to be the case? Employers now have a 'duty of care' which has to be strictly adhered to. Are we asking companies to provide Nursing Homes or Production lines? I'd also like to ask Cameroon man just where all these job vacancies are going to be conjured up from when we are already cluttering up the workplace by forcing people to work longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 Anyone reaching the age of 50 should be able to retire voluntarily on a full state pension but not forced to retire. By retiring it might give younger people the chance to succure a job and find out what it is like to earn your own living rather than collect benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 My son is disabled so I express an intrest in the proposed benefit changes. I am absolutely sick to death of seeing people who have absolutely NOTHING wrong with them claiming full disability benefits, this applies to almost the whole of the UK and to Benidorm where I am currently Here in Benidorm most of these people seem to me to be from Liverpool. With regards to child benefit there will be some tinkering with these proposals before the end game but I personally believe we should do one of two things 1) Pay benefit for the second child only 2) Only pay the benefit for the first two children Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 knight of the road - 2010-10-11 8:57 PM Anyone reaching the age of 50 should be able to retire voluntarily on a full state pension but not forced to retire. By retiring it might give younger people the chance to succure a job and find out what it is like to earn your own living rather than collect benefits. How on earth would you pay for these pensions, bearing in mind that we can no longer afford to pay for the present system ? (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted October 12, 2010 Author Share Posted October 12, 2010 knight of the road - 2010-10-11 8:57 PM Anyone reaching the age of 50 should be able to retire voluntarily on a full state pension but not forced to retire. By retiring it might give younger people the chance to succure a job and find out what it is like to earn your own living rather than collect benefits. I agree with your sentiments though as MalcD rightly points out, how would the country fund it? Even Private Pension schemes are an absolute horror story with huge chunks being taken out via the many financial 'back doors' involved to the point where the recipient ends up with very little after paying in substantial sums of money for a lifetime. This was highlighted in a recent Panorama programme and was frightening to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted October 12, 2010 Author Share Posted October 12, 2010 Syd - 2010-10-11 10:45 PM I am absolutely sick to death of seeing people who have absolutely NOTHING wrong with them claiming full disability benefits, this applies to almost the whole of the UK...... Syd The types you mention are the exception more than the rule. You are talking about people claiming incapacity benefit when they are not entitled to which is theft. A lot of this hysteria is whipped up by the rag mag papers and should not be seen as everyone in the UK is 'at it'. Also these people who are stealing do get caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 You dont just sign on for incapacity or disability benefits a doctor has to certify that you are unfit for work. I am led to believe that doctors were pushed into signing people off as sick in order to doctor the unemployment figures. And when the figures for incapacity benefits rose to alarming figures there was a role reversal leading to incapacity benefit claimants being put back on the JSA. So basically anyone recieving benefits of any kind were being knocked from pillar to post, to coin an over used phrase 'at the end of the day' there are simply not enough worthwhile jobs, simples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 malc d - 2010-10-12 12:21 AM knight of the road - 2010-10-11 8:57 PM Anyone reaching the age of 50 should be able to retire voluntarily on a full state pension but not forced to retire. By retiring it might give younger people the chance to succure a job and find out what it is like to earn your own living rather than collect benefits. How on earth would you pay for these pensions, bearing in mind that we can no longer afford to pay for the present system ? (?) If someone left school at the age of 15 and retired at the age of 50 they will have done 35 years of work and theoretically paid in 35 years of NIC's Presently I think you have to have 38 years worth of NIC's to qualify for a full state pension. So let the 35 year man retire if he wants to and let a young man step into his shoes and the NIC's he pays will pay for the future pensions. I would sooner have the older man who has done his fair share of work retire rather than have the younger guy live a life of claiming benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Bulletguy - 2010-10-12 1:17 AM knight of the road - 2010-10-11 8:57 PM Anyone reaching the age of 50 should be able to retire voluntarily on a full state pension but not forced to retire. By retiring it might give younger people the chance to succure a job and find out what it is like to earn your own living rather than collect benefits. I agree with your sentiments though as MalcD rightly points out, how would the country fund it? Even Private Pension schemes are an absolute horror story with huge chunks being taken out via the many financial 'back doors' involved to the point where the recipient ends up with very little after paying in substantial sums of money for a lifetime. This was highlighted in a recent Panorama programme and was frightening to say the least. My cousin had a rather domineering father who was constantly on my cousins back to take out a pension fund for when he was older. My cousin paid into that fund for many many years and when it matured it turned out to be worthless, robbong barstewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldlowie Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 knight of the road - 2010-10-12 9:33 AM You dont just sign on for incapacity or disability benefits a doctor has to certify that you are unfit for work. I am led to believe that doctors were pushed into signing people off as sick in order to doctor the unemployment figures. I think CliveH might have something to say about that 8-) 8-) 8-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Bulletguy - 2010-10-12 1:28 AM Syd - 2010-10-11 10:45 PM I am absolutely sick to death of seeing people who have absolutely NOTHING wrong with them claiming full disability benefits, this applies to almost the whole of the UK...... Syd The types you mention are the exception more than the rule. You are talking about people claiming incapacity benefit when they are not entitled to which is theft. A lot of this hysteria is whipped up by the rag mag papers and should not be seen as everyone in the UK is 'at it'. Also these people who are stealing do get caught. There are so few of them ?? I believe 40% of them that are called in for a fresh medical by a government doctor fail to turn up simply because they must know that the game is up I believe the abuse is rife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted October 13, 2010 Author Share Posted October 13, 2010 knight of the road - 2010-10-12 9:33 AM I am led to believe that doctors were pushed into signing people off as sick in order to doctor the unemployment figures. Casual employment is also used to 'massage' the true unemployment figure. They are counted as employed by the Government but i've always been of the view that until they hold a full term contract of employment, they are unemployed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Malcolm - I my professional opinion - Private Pensions are very bad value indeed - especially so for the Basic rate taxpayer. I am repeating myself here because we have gone over this before, but with Gordon’s first stealth tax taking £Billions out of pension funds, annuity rates falling to very low levels, the income you get from a pension pot is a fraction of what it was 20 years ago. If you had a pot of £100K in 1990, the annuity rate was c. 11% - so £100K would pay you £11,000 pa as income. So live 9 or 10 years and you have had all your "pot" back and are in "profit". Now annuity rates are 5% at age 60, maybe 6% at 65. So if in the Private Sector you try to retire at 60 you have to live for 20 years just to break even! It simply is not a good option anymore. Die early with an annuity and all you do is give your pot to those who live longer than you. The 20% tax relief you got is made virtually worthless by Gordens stealth tax on pension fund growth, so it is only worth considering Pensions if you are a higher rate taxpayer or your employer matches your contributions. As for the companies - I have not yet seen the Panorama programme - hope to see it today - but I understand the worst plan was from HSBC - and here we have that four letter word "Bank" again. There are some good plans out there - but anyone considering investing in anything REALLY should take into account exactly who they take advice from and what "agenda" that person has. Blowing our own trumpet - we work on an hourly or Menu basis and are retained by the client - that way our clients know we have to give them "Best Advice" and prove it! The Banks sell you what they have to, to make their targets. It really is not rocket science. What I think the Panorama programme shows is that whilst you pay nothing "up front" for the advice, the cost over the term of the policy is staggering. We prefer a fee, which for a firm or an employer is tax deductable and they can reclaim the VAT. Sadly the individual cannot do this, so here the client often chooses the commission route because if they are a higher rate tax payer they pay £60 net into a pension and the tax relief makes it up to £100. So if my fee is £100, it costs then £60 and this £60 is spread over the first 4 years of the policy - so they hardly notice it. In contrast - if we charge them a fee, unlike a Firm, an individual cannot reclaim the VAT or treat the cost as a tax deductable expense and so they would have to pay £100 + VAT which at current levels means a Bill of £117.50. And from next year VAT is 20% so that will rise to £120.00 So let me ask people, if you were a higher rate tax payer seeking advice on your pension - given that my fee is £100 and I do not give a stuff how I am paid (lol) (lol) - what payment method would you choose? a) £60 spread over 4 years? b) £120 to be paid at the time? The same is true of Basic Rate Tax payers but here the figures are £80 and £120. But seeing as we don't think pensions are a good option for BRTP'ers we rarely get into this and when we do - it is usually when we are retained by the employer to give advice to the staff and so the employer pays us, not the individual, and as said before the firm can treat our fee as a tax deductable expense as well as reclaiming the VAT. In contrast the Banks tend to simply ring the Cash machine "Ding" - and send you on your way with a plan they wanted to sell you - not what you actually needed. The Complaints data from the FOS demonstrate this in spades. http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/09/banks-top-complaints-chart-229383/ :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Just noticed on the Which site/report that "Ocean Finance" had 99% of complaints against it upheld by the Financial Ombudsman Service 8-) What a staggering percentage! 99% !! It does rather emphasise my point that when you have a service or product that is SO BAD that no independent adviser would touch it with several barge poles tied end to end - the only way you can sell it to the gullible is to advertise it on the Telly! To my mind this goes for all those funeral plans, equity release, re mortgage products advertised on the TV. Having looked at what they offer, there are less expensive, better designed options than what these awful companies try to flog you on the Telly. 8-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJay Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 We record a lot of ITV progs, and then fast forward the ads, so don't need to watch them. I don't need the TV to tell me what I should buy. If a product is good , it should not need a lot of adv ertising. I suppose soon we will have all the TOY ads, so the kids can pester Mum & Dad for them.!!! PJay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted October 13, 2010 Author Share Posted October 13, 2010 CliveH - 2010-10-13 8:50 AM What I think the Panorama programme shows is that whilst you pay nothing "up front" for the advice, the cost over the term of the policy is staggering. If you missed this programme Clive you should have a look at it via iPlayer as i'm sure you would find it interesting. Some of the figures mentioned and the way the money was 'moved around' in order to keep other pockets well lined was staggering. And of course as usual those most affected were people earning meagre sums who effectively had been conned through an entire lifetime. The company I work for, BAE Systems, supposedly has one of the better pension schemes in place......but even they found themselves facing a £130 million plus deficit a few years back of which we, the employees, had to fork out £40 million by increased monthly payments and cuts in the pay increase. Or as we saw it, paying for what the financial whizz kids had made a cock up of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Stopped paying into our private pensions with the Pru 10 years ago as I could not see the point *-) As I worked out that by the time we got to draw our pensions, it would proably be just enough to ensure we could not claim any benefits :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Bulletguy - 2010-10-13 11:45 AM The company I work for, BAE Systems, supposedly has one of the better pension schemes in place......but even they found themselves facing a £130 million plus deficit a few years back of which we, the employees, had to fork out £40 million by increased monthly payments and cuts in the pay increase. Or as we saw it, paying for what the financial whizz kids had made a cock up of. Please ensure you keep up the payments, I have 10years entitalment increasing by inflation rate to be paid out on my retirement, tied up in that scheme. As for incapacity benefits, I bet all those who fiddle it will keep getting payments, and the losers will be the genuine invalids. Which leads me to situation of my friend, at 55 he has to go to dialisis 3 times per week, he was made redundant by GM some years back and currently is unemployed, but the odds of any firm employing him is zero because of his illness, but he is not entiltaled to incapacity benifit and because he didn't fritter away his redundancy his job sekeers will soon be stopped untill his savings disappear, his best bet would be to claim a bad back if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted October 14, 2010 Author Share Posted October 14, 2010 colin - 2010-10-13 9:55 PM Bulletguy - 2010-10-13 11:45 AM The company I work for, BAE Systems, supposedly has one of the better pension schemes in place......but even they found themselves facing a £130 million plus deficit a few years back of which we, the employees, had to fork out £40 million by increased monthly payments and cuts in the pay increase. Or as we saw it, paying for what the financial whizz kids had made a cock up of. Please ensure you keep up the payments, I have 10years entitalment increasing by inflation rate to be paid out on my retirement, tied up in that scheme. Not after December......I'm retiring. (lol) (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 colin - 2010-10-13 9:55 PM Bulletguy - 2010-10-13 11:45 AM The company I work for, BAE Systems, supposedly has one of the better pension schemes in place......but even they found themselves facing a £130 million plus deficit a few years back of which we, the employees, had to fork out £40 million by increased monthly payments and cuts in the pay increase. Or as we saw it, paying for what the financial whizz kids had made a cock up of. Please ensure you keep up the payments, I have 10years entitalment increasing by inflation rate to be paid out on my retirement, tied up in that scheme. As for incapacity benefits, I bet all those who fiddle it will keep getting payments, and the losers will be the genuine invalids. Which leads me to situation of my friend, at 55 he has to go to dialisis 3 times per week, he was made redundant by GM some years back and currently is unemployed, but the odds of any firm employing him is zero because of his illness, but he is not entiltaled to incapacity benifit and because he didn't fritter away his redundancy his job sekeers will soon be stopped untill his savings disappear, his best bet would be to claim a bad back if you ask me. His best bet is to spend his redundancy money, after all if he hasn't got it they can't expect him to live off it ... I'm not talking about frittering it away, but using it for something that'll benefit him or that he'll enjoy ... so long as he can show that he didn't just do it to beat the system, I don't think he'll have any cause for worry (check with Citizens Advice Bureau first to be safe). My sister made the mistake of leaving her husband whilst she had their 'hidden' savings under her name (£15,000) ... she didn't get a bean until she spent most of it just to live, unfortunately some of the furniture etc she had to buy was crappy cheap stuff and didn't last, so she'd have been better off spending it all on good quality furnishings, that would last her, and then claiming benefit much sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Over the years peoples circumstances can change dramatically and people who would never dream of claiming benefits that they are entitled to are forced to claim. We applied for a community charge rebate but got knocked back because we had too much money in the bank, so much for being an honest John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duetto owner Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 Incapacity Benefits it has been means tested for ages, if you get a works pension your benefit is zero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.