OT: Lazy retirement

[Dave Liquorice]

early"

Not as astonished as me! Got a letter out of the blue a month or so back detailing what I could get and it was rather higher than this years April statement.

I'm still looking for the catch but everyone who should know says the

7.5% is fixed and imutable, even better is that it's being growing for the last 20+ years at that rate, compounded. Makes what was a peanuts pension into something rather better. There must be a catch, there must be...

This scheme is well funded(*), the scam if there is one is the 2.7 billion the employer owes the fund after taking a "payment holiday" in the 80's IIRC.

(*) Pensioners had a habit of kicking the bucket in well less than ten years from drawing their pension, resulting in less outgoings than expected from normal life expectantcy.

[Tim Streater]

In what way is that a benefit to society? They are just a scam to get large payouts irrespective of the financial situation when the benefits are delivered. If that is combined with it being a company pension (hmm, perhaps they always are? Not sure), then the company may well end up with unsustainable liabilities. What is supposed to happen then?

[Dave Liquorice]

This one dates from 1981 but is a Final Salary Pension Scheme contracted out of SERPS. The governmental pension rules keep changing and the whole thing is thus horribly complicated. I have sneaky feeling no one really knows how to work out what my pension should be, they just ask the computer and accept what it says.

Not actually asked for quotes for annunities but the IFA's and modeling tool provided by the employer indicate that the market would need to be pushed *very* hard to match the Pension Scheme benefits I'm entitled to.

Also don't asume an annuity is best for you, leaving the pot to grow somewhere and taking an income from it may well be the better option. Getting good *independant* financial advice is essential IMHO.

is banded about as where to find an IFA in your area.

[Indy Jess John]

They send around a hit man to finish you off when they think you have drawn enough from the fund?

Jim

[newshound]

Another +1 for IFAs.

I didn't even have to pay mine in the end as he took his fees (*not* commission) from money which went into a drawdown scheme, i.e. pre-tax!

[Martin]

The government doesn't need to have a fund because they aren't going to disappear overnight. Private insurers can and some times do. My pension doesn't have a fund but the payment is guaranteed by around 20 countries. In the days when there was a fund the money was manage by three large banks two of which managed to lose substantial amounts, at a time when anybody could get a reasonable risk free return.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Thanks for confirming you know nothing about the pension arrangements I'm talking about.

You sack all those board members who f**ked up the company. With no pensions, obviously. But you can be pretty sure that wouldn't happen.

[Bob Eager]

True. Except mine would have gone down in value if I'd waited much longer. Based on the best of:

- most recent year's salary

- any of the previous three years, adjusted for RPI

- average of any three year run in the last 13 years, adjusted for RPI

The last of the three was the best, but would have fallen off the end soon. A difference in pension of £3000-£4000 p.a.

[Bob Eager]

Got both of those. And one from the local garden centre.

Don't live in Wiltshire!

[Tim Streater]

You mean by entering into such arrangements in the first place. I heartily concur.

[dennis]

If the fund is managed properly the fund will be able to pay the liabilies even if the company goes bust. A properly funded pension doesn't rely on what the company is going to do in the future. Hence they are not a scam but a savings scheme.

[Tim Streater]

Must be why final salary schemes have all closed, then, with everyone saying that they are unsustainable in the long run.

[dennis]

They are if you expect to retire at the same age in 30 years time as they do now. Unless you or the company are prepared to put more in. Its why the public services are in dispute, they want the cake and don't want to pay. Some have estimated the FS schemes are worth a 25% pay increase which just shows how overpaid some public employees are when compared to the private sector.

[charles]

They seemed to be doing fine until Gordon Brown prevented them claiming back tax on the dividends they received.

[Tim Streater]

That affected all pension schemes AFAIK, not just the FS ones.

I really don't see why a company making widgets is allowed to have a "company pension scheme".

1) Not its core business

2) If an employee moves around a few times over the years, they end up with several schemes

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Quite. The only sensible type.

But of course plenty like Maxwell thought it was their money. Not part of the employees' remuneration..

But one which seems to have gone out of fashion.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Unsustainable. Ie, we want to spend the money on something else.

[dennis]

If its a proper fund they can't close it and spend the money. Unless you are saying they don't want to pay for any pension.

[Cursitor Doom]

There was nothing in law back then to prevent Maxwell from using the employees' pension fund to invest in any way he saw fit. If MGM hadn't gone t*ts-up, there would have been absolutely no case to answer. I do hope they've tightened that loophole up by now!

[Dave Liquorice]

You don't have to, they will deliver to any UK mainland address from

70 outlets across the country.