Creating a Gov.UK account

[Parley]

Aged Care can be expensive. Not sure if you are impacted by not having worked there much.

Worth looking into.

[DanO]

45 minutes ago, Parley said:

Aged Care can be expensive. Not sure if you are impacted by not having worked there much.

Sorry Parley, I'm not sure what you mean?

[Parley]

13 minutes ago, DanO said:

Sorry Parley, I'm not sure what you mean?

Well in Australia at least when you have a need to go into an Aged Care facility you need to make an upfront payment of a few hundred thousand dollars and then if you are on a aged pension that is used to pay the weekly fees.

Just worth doing some research into how it would work in the UK if you never qualify for a pension over there. Presumably you will need to self fund it. If you can't then the council will need to pay for you.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Parley

[DanO]

Oh I see. Yes I hadn't considered that. I just assumed the NHS would take care of us?

Not quite 60 yet, so health hasn't been a big consideration.

Thanks for the suggestion.

[Amber Snowball]

3 minutes ago, DanO said:

Oh I see. Yes I hadn't considered that. I just assumed the NHS would take care of us?

Not quite 60 yet, so health hasn't been a big consideration.

Thanks for the suggestion.

The nhs will indeed take care of your health. Aged care is more complex and is subject to assets/income tests but the state will cover it if you can’t. There have been recent changes that are supposed to protect more of peoples money but in reality it won’t. It’s probably worth having a look at the subject but not stressing over it. Be warned, when the government talk about “care costs “ in relation to aged care payment cap they mean actual care which doesn’t include accommodation, meals, cleaning etc.

[Sloth]

On 24/10/2021 at 20:59, DanO said:

May be doable...but I realise there is a minimum withdrawal % of income stream. So given my super...it may not be possible.  Thanks for the input ever.yone, plenty of food for thought.

The way around the minimum percentage rule is to leave it in accumulation mode and withdraw lump sums as you need it once you meet a condition of release.

[DanO]

57 minutes ago, Sloth said:

The way around the minimum percentage rule is to leave it in accumulation mode and withdraw lump sums as you need it once you meet a condition of release.

Thanks Sloth.

Sounds like a fair suggestion!

[Blue Flu]

On 24/10/2021 at 09:11, Marisawright said:

...but the British pension isn't like the Aussie one, where you only need the 10 years and then you can potentially get the full pension.  The UK pension is pro rata even if you're living there.   So even if you've got the 10 years, all you'd get would be 10/35ths (I think) of the pension, which wouldn't be much.  Actually, you'd get a little more, because you could claim your years working in Australia from 1995 to 1999.  

You probably know this, but neither yourself or your wife will get the Australian pension if you leave before you are old enough to claim it.

I was told over the phone would get full UK pension if residing in UK , but only what has been paid in would be transportable. Meaning the top up payments (above what I have paid) would be means tested and not paid if no longer in UK. 

That was my understanding . As for Australian super, it would be taxed by UK (not obviously if cashed in before leaving) Best to remember all things like property in Australia will be taxed by ATO at first dollar earned. 

It seems UK does not allow very much in cash before crossing the means tested amount. Australia wins out on that. Just how does UK expect one to pay aged care if necessary? 

This is my understanding of what happens anyway. Please feel free to question or indeed correct any false assumptions on my part. 

 

[Marisawright]

3 hours ago, Blue Flu said:

I was told over the phone would get full UK pension if residing in UK , but only what has been paid in would be transportable. Meaning the top up payments (above what I have paid)

No.  The UK pension is not means tested.

My understanding is as follows:

If residing in the UK, you would receive a pro rata UK pension based on your National Insurance record only.   HOWEVER, you could submit a claim to have your years working in Australia recognized and added to your NI record (but only up to the year 2000 when the agreement lapsed).   This could obviously increase your pension substantially. 

The snag is that you get paid the increased amount ONLY when legally resident in the UK.  If you move overseas, the pension reverts to the original amount. 

[Blue Flu]

2 hours ago, Marisawright said:

No.  The UK pension is not means tested.

My understanding is as follows:

If residing in the UK, you would receive a pro rata UK pension based on your National Insurance record only.   HOWEVER, you could submit a claim to have your years working in Australia recognized and added to your NI record (but only up to the year 2000 when the agreement lapsed).   This could obviously increase your pension substantially. 

The snag is that you get paid the increased amount ONLY when legally resident in the UK.  If you move overseas, the pension reverts to the original amount. 

That's what I was referring to. The amount I have not contributed to would indeed be means tested and not paid if resided in country other than UK. (not sure if that applies to Rep of Ireland, if decided to move there though) 

I have just been in contact with HM Customs and Revenue and initial payment is about to go through to NI account. I intend to send a large sum tomorrow to cover time remaining allowed still to contribute to. 

I must say, almost all lovely folk to speak with, be in Newcastle or London and all bar one have been so helpful in the several calls made. It makes a change.  

[Blue Flu]

On 25/10/2021 at 14:12, Amber Snowball said:

The nhs will indeed take care of your health. Aged care is more complex and is subject to assets/income tests but the state will cover it if you can’t. There have been recent changes that are supposed to protect more of peoples money but in reality it won’t. It’s probably worth having a look at the subject but not stressing over it. Be warned, when the government talk about “care costs “ in relation to aged care payment cap they mean actual care which doesn’t include accommodation, meals, cleaning etc.

I heard something quite recently that Boris was adapting an unusual policy for his side of politics. Quite socialist in fact. It went along the lines that nobody would pay more than GBP 90,000 in the age for care. 

Anybody know more about this? A very attractive feature to living in UK if true. 

[Marisawright]

16 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

That's what I was referring to. The amount I have not contributed to would indeed be means tested and not paid if resided in country other than UK. 

Nothing to do with means testing at all. It simply will not get paid if you are not living in the UK, regardless of your means

[Amber Snowball]

23 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

I heard something quite recently that Boris was adapting an unusual policy for his side of politics. Quite socialist in fact. It went along the lines that nobody would pay more than GBP 90,000 in the age for care. 

Anybody know more about this? A very attractive feature to living in UK if true. 

Yes this is the cap I was speaking about but that cap doesn’t include accommodation and associated costs only actual “care”. I think it will only help a small % of people, it was worked out somewhere, I’ll look. Who has £86000 without selling their house? Not as socialist as it first appears unfortunately. Your last £23000 or so is protected.

[Ken]

34 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

I heard something quite recently that Boris was adapting an unusual policy for his side of politics. Quite socialist in fact. It went along the lines that nobody would pay more than GBP 90,000 in the age for care. 

Anybody know more about this? A very attractive feature to living in UK if true. 

What is socialist about multimillionaires only having to pay 90,000 while people with no more than 90,000 to their name have to pay the same? Clearly Boris is thinking ahead about the cost of looking after his Dad and doesn't want his inheritance to be spent on it.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Ken

[Amber Snowball]

This is part of an article in the metro which explains the flaws a bit @Blue Flu
 

 

Talking to my mum and dad about it, they have the perception that if they set aside £86,000 pounds that’s it – that’s all they’re going to have to worry about and they’re going to have have their care covered. 

‘But it doesn’t actually work that way at all. It’s a lot of smoke and mirrors potentially, and it doesn’t necessarily stack up.’

Sorry, this video isn't available any more.

He said that the main reason for this is that only the cost of care itself counts towards the cap amount. Someone’s ‘hotel costs’ at a care home, such as accommodation and meals, are not included, even though they obviously still need to pay for them.

A bill for the specific care home someone uses will not be met, either.

Instead, people will be allocated a certain amount based on what the local authority believes is an appropriate fee – known as the ‘personal budget’. If someone chooses a care home that charges above the average, the extra will not count towards the cap. 

Jon gives the example of a typical care home costing someone about £750 a week. Their local authority may have calculated that the ’personal budget’ for a care home is only £600 per week. From that figure, they will not pay the ‘hotel costs’ which could be around £230 a week. That means the only amount the government would take into account is £370 a week – even though the person is actually spending more than double that. 

‘Based on those average figures, it would take 232 weeks for you to reach the cap,’ Jon said. ‘During that time, you’ve paid, on average, about £175,000. 

‘Even when you reach the cap, you’re still going to have to pay your hotel costs and the extra over what the local authority thinks you should be paying.’

That extra could come to around £20,000 a year, even after they have already spent more than twice the care cap figure.

People could be ‘very surprised’ by how much they still had to pay, he said.

Many will never reach the cap at all and will receive no help, he adds, as the average life expectancy for somebody going into care is two years – one year if they’re going into nursing care.

[ramot]

59 minutes ago, Ken said:

What is socialist about multimillionaires only having to pay 90,000 while people with no more than 90,000 to their name have to pay the same? Clearly Boris is thinking ahead about the cost of looking after his Dad and doesn't want his inheritance to be spent on it.

Well the state took more than that from my mother, a single parent who had worked hard all her life, did without lots to manage to buy a house, with a special mortgage from the council, and had to sell it to fund her care, she was allowed to keep her last 23.000 pds!!! The new rules might benefit some ordinary people like my mother?

Edited October 26, 2021 by ramot

[Blue Flu]

1 hour ago, Marisawright said:

Nothing to do with means testing at all. It simply will not get paid if you are not living in the UK, regardless of your means

It is a means tested payment to my understanding in UK to get full amount. ( about GBP 180 per week) Abroad it is paid what has been paid in. This is a top up, not NI paid. 

[Blue Flu]

1 hour ago, Amber Snowball said:

Yes this is the cap I was speaking about but that cap doesn’t include accommodation and associated costs only actual “care”. I think it will only help a small % of people, it was worked out somewhere, I’ll look. Who has £86000 without selling their house? Not as socialist as it first appears unfortunately. Your last £23000 or so is protected.

But what does one pay in UK to get decent care at the moment?  I take your point with regards the GBP 86,000 , but even if sold house, that would leave a substantial amount for rest of life living surely? 

[Blue Flu]

1 hour ago, Ken said:

What is socialist about multimillionaires only having to pay 90,000 while people with no more than 90,000 to their name have to pay the same? Clearly Boris is thinking ahead about the cost of looking after his Dad and doesn't want his inheritance to be spent on it.

Quite true. The only factor is it there is at least a limit to costs. 

[Marisawright]

11 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

It is a means tested payment to my understanding in UK to get full amount. ( about GBP 180 per week) Abroad it is paid what has been paid in. This is a top up, not NI paid. 

This is from the .gov.uk website:

"You usually need a total of 30 qualifying years of National Insurance contributions or credits to get the full basic State Pension.

This means that for 30 years, one or more of the following applied to you:

you were working and paying National Insurance

you were getting National Insurance Credits, for example you were unemployed, sick, or a parent or carer

you were paying voluntary National Insurance contributions

If you have fewer than 30 qualifying years, your basic State Pension will be less than £137.60 per week.

 

No mention of means testing.  I may be wrong, but I have looked through the site and I can't see any reference to it, nor have I ever come across any suggestion of means testing in the past. It's all to do with number of years.

The difference between living in the UK and living overseas is that you may not get additional benefits which are available to pensioners in the UK.   Also, if you're an Australian who has claimed Australian work years, as mentioned before.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Marisawright

[Blue Flu]

1 hour ago, Amber Snowball said:

This is part of an article in the metro which explains the flaws a bit @Blue Flu
 

 

Talking to my mum and dad about it, they have the perception that if they set aside £86,000 pounds that’s it – that’s all they’re going to have to worry about and they’re going to have have their care covered. 

‘But it doesn’t actually work that way at all. It’s a lot of smoke and mirrors potentially, and it doesn’t necessarily stack up.’

Sorry, this video isn't available any more.

He said that the main reason for this is that only the cost of care itself counts towards the cap amount. Someone’s ‘hotel costs’ at a care home, such as accommodation and meals, are not included, even though they obviously still need to pay for them.

A bill for the specific care home someone uses will not be met, either.

Instead, people will be allocated a certain amount based on what the local authority believes is an appropriate fee – known as the ‘personal budget’. If someone chooses a care home that charges above the average, the extra will not count towards the cap. 

Jon gives the example of a typical care home costing someone about £750 a week. Their local authority may have calculated that the ’personal budget’ for a care home is only £600 per week. From that figure, they will not pay the ‘hotel costs’ which could be around £230 a week. That means the only amount the government would take into account is £370 a week – even though the person is actually spending more than double that. 

‘Based on those average figures, it would take 232 weeks for you to reach the cap,’ Jon said. ‘During that time, you’ve paid, on average, about £175,000. 

‘Even when you reach the cap, you’re still going to have to pay your hotel costs and the extra over what the local authority thinks you should be paying.’

That extra could come to around £20,000 a year, even after they have already spent more than twice the care cap figure.

People could be ‘very surprised’ by how much they still had to pay, he said.

Many will never reach the cap at all and will receive no help, he adds, as the average life expectancy for somebody going into care is two years – one year if they’re going into nursing care.

Thanks. That seems to explain it rather well. It seems not a lot of benefit at the end of the day when other costs added. A shame as UK was looking better for retirement on many fronts and that may have proved to be the icing......

[Blue Flu]

7 minutes ago, Marisawright said:

This is from the .gov.uk website:

"You usually need a total of 30 qualifying years of National Insurance contributions or credits to get the full basic State Pension.

This means that for 30 years, one or more of the following applied to you:

you were working and paying National Insurance

you were getting National Insurance Credits, for example you were unemployed, sick, or a parent or carer

you were paying voluntary National Insurance contributions

If you have fewer than 30 qualifying years, your basic State Pension will be less than £137.60 per week.

 

No mention of means testing.  I may be wrong, but I have looked through the site and I can't see any reference to it, nor have I ever come across any suggestion of means testing in the past. It's all to do with number of years.

The difference between living in the UK and living overseas is that you may not get additional benefits which are available to pensioners in the UK.   Also, if you're an Australian who has claimed Australian work years, as mentioned before.

 

Well Newcastle informed me I would get the NI paid (not asset tested) some sixteen or so years plus an added amount that would take it to about GBP 180 from next year (but additional would be asset tested) (also lost if left UK) 

Nothing in writing so meaningless I suppose , but the payment received living abroad is clear. 

[Amber Snowball]

16 minutes ago, Blue Flu said:

Thanks. That seems to explain it rather well. It seems not a lot of benefit at the end of the day when other costs added. A shame as UK was looking better for retirement on many fronts and that may have proved to be the icing......

I don’t subscribe to the “I must leave an inheritance” thing, if you need care and have assets/money it should be used and Australia has a system that expects people who can pay, to pay. The cost of aged care is enormous, so not sure many places can offer a fully subsidised package. Germany have an insurance type system I think, wonder if that’s a better system? Trouble is we have NI but that money is just absorbed into other government income rather than ring fenced in any particular way it seems, so people would ark up about paying “again” as they might see it.  
They reassuring thing I suppose is that the majority of people don’t go into nursing homes, about 8-9% in both countries the last I heard.

[Marisawright]

8 hours ago, Blue Flu said:

Well Newcastle informed me I would get the NI paid (not asset tested) some sixteen or so years plus an added amount that would take it to about GBP 180 from next year (but additional would be asset tested) (also lost if left UK) 

Nothing in writing so meaningless I suppose , but the payment received living abroad is clear. 

The added amount is probably a Pension Credit which is a welfare benefit available to those with an inadequate pension, but I know nothing about it. 

Do you have an Australian work record pre -2000 which you could claim on arrival in the UK? That would boost your pension

[Cup Final 1973]

I’m assuming you’re talking about your pension estimate Blue Flu but it seems incredibly generous if you have only 16 years NI contributions.