Posted February 8th, 2010
In many occupational schemes (especially the statutory ones – e.g. Police, Armed Forces) there has been a disparity between the normal retirement age of the member and that given to a pension credit member (the ex spouse). For example, the member can retire from the pension scheme at age 52 but the ex spouse cannot retire until age 60.
In addition, where the pension is in payment, there will be an immediate reduction of benefit for the member but the ex spouse’s pension will not kick in until age 60 (which could be many years away).
This issue has been neatly termed as “income gap syndrome” and it has been found not to go against the anti discrimination provisions of European Law.
Of course, this assumes that the ex spouse decides upon an internal transfer as the means to facilitate the pension share. There may be many reasons why the other option (an external transfer) is appropriate, but there will many situations where the only choice available is an internal transfer.
Regulations which came into force in April 2009 made provision for a partial solution to this issue which some of the statutory schemes are now starting to implement. The NHS scheme will now permit pension credit members to draw benefits after age 50 (or 55 from 6 April 2010) whilst an Armed Forces (2005) pension credit member can draw benefits at age 55. It should be noted that actuarial reductions will apply for early payment.
From a financial planning point of view it is wise to review the drawing of a pension credit benefit in line with your overall goals and objectives to ensure that any reduction is understood and budgeted for.
For more information on this please contact me on 0800 092 1229 or contact me by email, phil@thedivorceifa.co.uk
Tags: Actuarial Reductions, Armed Forces, Divorce, Early Payment, Ex Spouse, Financial Planning, Income Gap Syndrome, internal transfer, NHS Scheme, Normal Retirement Age, Occupational Scheme, Pension Credit, Pension Credit Member, Pension Scheme, pension share, Police, Spouse, Statutory Scheme | Posted in Pension Credit |
Comments: No Comments yet!
Posted November 23rd, 2009
It is often stated that Cash Equivalent Transfer Values (CETVS) are not an ideal method of calculating the true value of a defined benefit pension scheme on divorce. This is because they merely provide a snapshot of the value of a member’s pension benefit at a particular point in time.
What is most surprising is by how much these valuations can undervalue these benefits and therefore, how the unwary could find that they are losing out on potentially thousands of pounds.
I have highlighted below some examples taken from a survey done by the actuaries, Bradshaw Dixon Moore based on a sample of their own reports. The findings are startling and what is most surprising is the variations between the same schemes, particularly the Public Sector and Uniformed Services schemes.
|
Scheme
|
CETV
|
Actuarial
|
Difference
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NHS
|
£120,000
|
£164,000
|
+28%
|
|
Local Government
|
£84,000
|
£138,000
|
+64%
|
|
Police
|
£283,000
|
£520,000
|
+84%
|
|
Army
|
£105,000
|
£394,000
|
+275%
|
|
Private Company
|
£380,000
|
£608,000
|
+60%
|
You can get the full details of their findings here. Pension-CETV-value-comparisons
I have been asked to comment recently on whether actuarial valuation reports are worthwhile and what value they add to financial negotiations. Many clients are naturally trying to reduce costs during divorce and see this as a potential cost saving.
My advice is that where defined benefits are involved, regardless of the scheme, an actuarial valuation is a necessity. By finding out the true value of the pension assets you will be in a much better position to negotiate a fairer settlement.
For information on any of the information provided here, please contact me at advice@thedivorceifa.co.uk
Tags: Actuarial Valuation Report, Army, Bradshaw Dixon Moore, Cash Equivalent Transfer Value, CETV, Defined Benefit, Divorce, Local Government, NHS, Pension, Pension on Divorce, Pension Scheme, Police, Public Sector, Settlement, Uniformed Services | Posted in Transfer values |
Comments: No Comments yet!