Personal illustration

japost · Post by **japost** » 17 Jan 2017, 12:09

Just received my personal illustration. Not happy at all ! Excluding notional state pension my before & after pension has near enough halved !

The illustration would be with 36 years service up until my 60th birthday. The same happens up until age 65 ( 41 years service ) , pension is halved .
7k a year less pension for a £750 one off lump sum - no thanks .

Hawkey99 · Post by **Hawkey99** » 17 Jan 2017, 12:36

Did you ask for an illustration or are they sending out one to us all.

Thanks

Jefferson Starfish · Post by **Jefferson Starfish** » 17 Jan 2017, 12:52

Hawkey99 wrote:Did you ask for an illustration or are they sending out one to us all.

Thanks

If you read the letter that accompanied your pension review booklet, you will know that we will all be getting one!

Marke87 · Post by **Marke87** » 17 Jan 2017, 13:40

Just got mine.

If i retire at 65 I will be £9400 a year worse off!! AND they expect me to pay £4.54 a week more towards my pension.

If we were to half Moya Greene's pension she would sue the company and Win!!

Pretty peee'd off to be fair!

japost · Post by **japost** » 17 Jan 2017, 13:50

Jefferson Starfish wrote:
Hawkey99 wrote:Did you ask for an illustration or are they sending out one to us all.

Thanks
If you read the letter that accompanied your pension review booklet, you will know that we will all be getting one!

Automatically sent oe out

Zicomurphy · Post by **Zicomurphy** » 17 Jan 2017, 14:19

Just posted on another thread, over £6000 a year worse off for me. The only good thing is we are being screwed over so badly that if it come to a vote for industrial action I don't think anyone would be swayed to vote no by the downright insulting offer of £750.

boyjammer · Post by **boyjammer** » 17 Jan 2017, 14:33

2 grand a year for me (if I go at 60), thats after 34 years service already, if I stay to 65 it rises to 4k a yearI lose. i used to like working for RM, have always worked here from school, now though ???,

author88 · Post by **author88** » 17 Jan 2017, 15:04

Just got mine as well ...Big dip for me too :(

Does anyone know the answer to this question? ... The proposal is that it's now going to be called a DC (Defined Contribution) Pot. And say's we build up our own individual pension pots. I have heard that this is something that they do in America ... and the problem a lot of American's don't realise is that once the pot is gone, its gone! ... i.e These DC pots don't pay up until you die ...just until the pot is emptied from paying you out. ....So does anyone know whether the new proposal from RM will continue like the old pension and pay until death (and spousal after) ...or will this new proposal only pay us as individuals until our little pots are empty??

thanks in advance if anyone can shed light on this :)

Post by **RobertT** » 17 Jan 2017, 15:17

The illustrations assume you buy an annuity(income for life) with your DC pot and that it will offer similar benefits to the existing DB scheme. In other words it goes up by inflation each year and pays out a spouses pension on your death.

You can chose to buy an annuity that doesn’t do either if you wish, or you can chose not to buy an annuity at all, in which case yes there is a possibility you might run out of money.

Google 'annuity rates' & 'defined contribution pensions' for more info.

Downeagle · Post by **Downeagle** » 17 Jan 2017, 15:26

I received my illustration like others today and the figures for aged 60 and 65 are nearly 3 times the figures from my 2016 pension illustration estimated.
I've rung both the helplines and the 2016 advisors can not talk about the 2017 illustration and vice versa, I was told to focus on the percentage figures rather than the amount!
I replied I had the two sets of figures and just wanted to know which were correct, what is the point in sending out the illustration with amounts if we are to ignore them and to concentrate on percentages?
What a load of tosh and the inclusion again of the state pension figures which we may or not qualify for is even more camouflage.

I received a call from a RM pension manager and the upshot is that I should ignore the figures in the new illustration and go by those given in last year's. I will be 60 in 2018.

BeamishStout · Post by **BeamishStout** » 17 Jan 2017, 15:30

Nowhere in the key assumptions/illustration does it mention the maximum tax-free lump sump.

Do these figures include this lump sum (I'm assuming they don't)? And if they don't, then their illustrative benefits for retiring at 60/65 will be reduced accordingly for all who take all or an element of their lump sum. Got to say that staying on till 65 v leaving at 60 (I will be 59 in April 2017) means that I'd only be gaining an extra £1300 under the new proposed system (rather than £2400 under current) and makes my ultimate decision as to when to retire possibly easier. Will be looking long and hard about the implications should this go ahead. Could be an earlier retirement for me

I dislike the presentation of this document because the headline figures including state pension might indicate you may be reasonably comfortable retiring between 60-65 but of course the state pension will not kick in until after 65 (by at least a year). I know I could not live solely on the pension provided by RM until the state pension kicks in. The proposed plan will make this even more relevant to many.

The figure of £750 is derisory and insulting. At the very least the union needs to screw them for as much as they can if there is no ultimate alternative.

For people in their early years of employment I can only assume that their new projections will be way way worse (than mine) as reported by some of the posters in this thread.

Post by **RobertT** » 17 Jan 2017, 15:55

BeamishStout wrote:Nowhere in the key assumptions/illustration does it mention the maximum tax-free lump sump. Do these figures include this lump sum (I'm assuming they don't)? And if they don't, then their illustrative benefits for retiring at 60/65 will be reduced accordingly for all who take all or an element of their lump sum. Got to say that staying on till 65 v leaving at 60 (I will be 59 in April 2017) means that I'd only be gaining an extra £1300 under the new proposed system (rather than £2400 under current) and makes my ultimate decision as to when to retire possibly easier. Will be looking long and hard about the implications should this go ahead. Could be an earlier retirement for me

I dislike the presentation of this document because the headline figures including state pension might indicate you may be reasonably comfortable retiring between 60-65 but of course the state pension will not kick in until after 65 (by at least a year). I know I could not live solely on the pension provided by RM until the state pension kicks in. The proposed plan will make this even more relevant to many.

The figure of £750 is derisory and insulting. At the very least the union needs to screw them for as much as they can if there is no ultimate alternative.

For people in their early years of employment I can only assume that their new projections will be way way worse (than mine) as reported by some of the posters in this thread.

Section A/B members get a lump sum as standard so I assume for pension up to 2018, that is still the case.

Section C members have the choice of commuting some of their DB pension to get a lump sum. It does say in the notes(no.11): No allowance has been made…..for the option to exchange pension for cash at retirement.

vmaxv4 · Post by **vmaxv4** » 17 Jan 2017, 16:39

39 years service at 1st April 2018
NRA 60 loss of £347
NRA 65 loss of £1633
Lump Sum No change.
Contributions under proposal Minus £1.61 (Accounts for losing pensionable early shift allowance)

ROSSCO · Post by **ROSSCO** » 17 Jan 2017, 16:51

Why is the current contribution going up on our side by £4.14?

Post by **cloherty1976** » 17 Jan 2017, 16:53

vmaxv4 wrote:39 years service at 1st April 2018
NRA 60 loss of £347
NRA 65 loss of £1633
Lump Sum No change.
Contributions under proposal Minus £1.61 (Accounts for losing pensionable early shift allowance)

I'd take it at 60 if I was in your position as at least you have what you have worked for. It seems to me it is only going to get worse and the longer you have left the reality is it's down hill. It's a shame but pensions look a thing of the past and I think we will have to look at new way of saving for our futures.