[BBC News] MHK support for homeowner grants

[ai_Droid]

That could possibly be a simple case of sound economics, if a little harsh. Lending someone of that age money is obviously inherently risky. After all, at 83 years old the government could end up just subsidising the improvement of your imminent inheritance, and it's just possible that you earn considerably more than 15k per annum.

 

It's a grant, not a loan.

[Albert Tatlock]

That could possibly be a simple case of sound economics, if a little harsh.

That logic is why they get away with letting anything up to UK 50,000 pensioners die as a result of cold weather each year in the UK.

Who's 'they?' The nanny-statists you so often bemoan? The quality of the housing stock isn't the Government's fault.

No, the government, who don't give enough money back to people who paid into a system all their lives, a generation that were told they were putting it into that system for their retirement pension and the NHS. The difference is these days, you and I are advised that NI contributions are not likely to be enough to cover our pensions, and that need to take additional steps if we are to live above the poverty line after we retire.

[ai_Droid]

No, the government, who don't give enough money back to people who paid into a system all their lives, a generation that were told they were putting it into that system for their retirement pension and the NHS. The difference is these days, you and I are advised that NI contributions are not likely to be enough to cover our pensions, and that need to take additional steps if we are to live above the poverty line after we retire.

 

Tricky one this. If the government raise the NI contribution, there's an outcry. If the Government can't afford to raise the pension, there's an outcry. Pensions were never calculated with todays life expectancies either.

 

The forcasts were buggered, expected returns from investment didn't meet actual, so the funds aren't enough. What's the solution?

[keyboarder]

It's a grant, not a loan.

 

My 83 year old mum tried to get a loan for home improvements and was turned down

[ai_Droid]

Apply my correction to both posts

[Albert Tatlock]

No, the government, who don't give enough money back to people who paid into a system all their lives, a generation that were told they were putting it into that system for their retirement pension and the NHS. The difference is these days, you and I are advised that NI contributions are not likely to be enough to cover our pensions, and that need to take additional steps if we are to live above the poverty line after we retire.

 

Tricky one this. If the government raise the NI contribution, there's an outcry. If the Government can't afford to raise the pension, there's an outcry. Pensions were never calculated with todays life expectancies either.

 

The forcasts were buggered, expected returns from investment didn't meet actual, so the funds aren't enough. What's the solution?

To save 50,000 UK pensioners from dying from the effects of the cold - obviously one solution is global warming. More seriously, how come the government can suddenly find £100 billion to bail out Northern Rock? - a bank run by directors who should really be facing jail terms, IMO, not bonuses and golden parachutes, and whose activities should have been regulated by government (particularly the FSA) - yet treat pensioners so abysmally? The solution is surely to get government to manage our money and economy better, and not allow large companies to dominate and profiteer on essential utilities at the expense of the poor (many of whom who are pensioners) - and many of whom have to pay extra for the privelage of having 'pay as you go' type meters.

 

Obviously, we can't carry on paying large state pensions to everyone, and we have been told in recent decades that and have to make our own provision. But I'm talking about those over 60 now who were 'promised' a state pension after the war and into the 1950s and 1960s after the introduction of the 'welfare state' and obviously relied on it, not forgetting the many thousands of pensioners who got ripped of by various company pension schemes in the 1980's/1990's.

[ai_Droid]

To save 50,000 UK pensioners from dying from the effects of the cold - obviously one solution is global warming. More seriously, how come the government can suddenly find £100 billion to bail out Northern Rock? - a bank run by directors who should really be facing jail terms, IMO, not bonuses and golden parachutes, and whose activities should have been regulated by government (particularly the FSA) - yet treat pensioners so abysmally?

 

The government didn't give £100 billion to Northern Rock. The loaned them money against a pretty good book of business. A book that Northern Rock is now redeeming like mad by offering all it's customers shitty deals so they move their mortgage to pay bay the public.

 

If the government hadn't stepped in, and allowed one of the biggest lenders in the country to fail, the bleating would have been one hundred fold.

 

 

The solution is surely to get government to manage our money and economy better, and not allow large companies to dominate and profiteer on essential utilities at the expense of the poor (many of whom who are pensioners) - and many of whom have to pay extra for the privelage of having 'pay as you go' type meters.

 

That doesn't help, but it's not a solution. The options are simple:

 

- for us to pay more tax/ni

- for us all to retire later

- for us all to take less in a pension

 

Obviously, we can't carry on paying large state pensions to everyone, and we have been told in recent decades that and have to make our own provision. But I'm talking about those over 60 now who were 'promised' a state pension after the war and into the 1950s and 1960s after the introduction of the 'welfare state' and obviously relied on it, not forgetting the many thousands of pensioners who got ripped of by various company pension schemes in the 1980's/1990's.

 

Yes, the government should be able to predict the future entirely and accurately. It's totally unreasonable that they got this wrong.

[Albert Tatlock]

Yes, the government should be able to predict the future entirely and accurately. It's totally unreasonable that they got this wrong.

I'm sure you'll be buying the administrators of your pension fund(s) and IFA a drink in the pub saying: "don't worry about it" when they hand over your retirement cheque and tell you: "Sorry it's not as much as you thought, we got the target figure and our advice wrong. We knew it 20 years ago but didn't think it was important to tell you at the time. Plus we also used some of your money to buy another company 10 years ago which didn't quite work out, and used some of your money to pay dividends to our shareholders. We also lent half of your money to someone who obviously couldn't pay it back". That's what the government have effectively done to people, allowed banks and investment/pension funds to do, and what some poorly regulated company pension schemes have done to their members - and affected millions of now retired folk. Tougher regulation is a modern concept (again I remind you I am talking about the previous generation).

 

Of course the government can predict the future based on what is paid into a system, how many people are paying in, what they are paying in, and roughly what is going to have to be paid out in the future. When you get to 40 you will find they will calculate it for you and write to you telling you - it's called a pension forecast. The exception being when they grab and spend that money elsewhere. That's why it's important who gets elected, and that they are not allowed to do 'smoke and mirrors' tricks with our money, and ensure it is managed properly (with the level of investment risk down to you - given regulated advice).

[motormouth mabel]

It's a load of b***ocks!! My 83 year old mum tried to get a loan for home improvements and was turned down because she had moved out of the property untill she had some of the renovations done. Her income was less than 15,000 and she had moved out because of damp and urgent work required. They were slow to reply and quite rude and had no sympathy for her situation whatsoever telling her to sell the house!! w**kers!!

 

This government should be ashamed of themselves in how they treat their elderly folk, the civil servent in charge of the grants process clearly has ebeneezer qualities. Thats why the money has not been claimed Mr Shimmin!! look at your department!!

 

That could possibly be a simple case of sound economics, if a little harsh. Lending someone of that age money is obviously inherently risky. After all, at 83 years old the government could end up just subsidising the improvement of your imminent inheritance, and it's just possible that you earn considerably more than 15k per annum.

 

Re Keyboarder comments

Well , what a grim facist, prejudiced, ageist attitude!! must check the departments paperwork to see if there was a "too old lets give them a grant for a coffin only, tick box". She is moving back into her drafty cold old property because she wants to and she is a lively independent 83 year old and that's her right. Between our family we are helping her without the governments grant system to do this. She and my dad both served the Island during the war, some attitude eh!!

[ai_Droid]

I'm sure you'll be buying the administrators of your pension fund(s) and IFA a drink in the pub saying: "don't worry about it" when they hand over your retirement cheque and tell you: "Sorry it's not as much as you thought, we got the target figure and our advice wrong.

We knew it 20 years ago but didn't think it was important to tell you at the time. Plus we also used some of your money to buy another company 10 years ago which didn't quite work out, and used some of your money to pay dividends to our shareholders. We also lent half of your money to someone who obviously couldn't pay it back". That's what the government have effectively done to people, allowed banks and investment/pension funds to do, and what some poorly regulated company pension schemes have done to their members - and affected millions of now retired folk. Tougher regulation is a modern concept (again I remind you I am talking about the previous generation).

 

There's so much rot in that paragraph that I don't know where to begin. Talking specifically about the manx pension fund, which is facing shortfalls because of poor performance and because of an aging population, where does the bullcrap above fit in?

 

Of course the government can predict the future based on what is paid into a system, how many people are paying in, what they are paying in, and roughly what is going to have to be paid out in the future. When you get to 40 you will find they will calculate it for you and write to you telling you - it's called a pension forecast. The exception being when they grab and spend that money elsewhere. That's why it's important who gets elected, and that they are not allowed to do 'smoke and mirrors' tricks with our money, and ensure it is managed properly (with the level of investment risk down to you - given regulated advice).

 

Pensions are invested into assets that have underperformed, and nobody was going to predict that accurately. Even so, it doesn't change what I said, the only way to make pensions work with our current life expecatancies and low population growth is to pay more in or work for longer. Bleat all you like, but thems the facts.

[Albert Tatlock]

Pensions are invested into assets that have underperformed, and nobody was going to predict that accurately. Even so, it doesn't change what I said, the only way to make pensions work with our current life expecatancies and low population growth is to pay more in or work for longer. Bleat all you like, but thems the facts.

I knowwwwwww, which is why I put two reminders in telling you I was talking about the previous generation - those currently retired.

[ai_Droid]

I knowwwwwww, which is why I put two reminders in telling you I was talking about the previous generation - those currently retired.

 

What difference does that make? Take your mans 85 year old gran above. In 1950 when she was paying her pension, it will have been calculated that she only had a 50% chance of reaching 60, but it turned out that 80% of them reached 60, and not only that, but they're living 25% longer than expected. That's a large shortfall, that's unpredictable.

 

Add to that the inflation and asset price dives in the last 20 years, and you've got a situation nobody predicted. To blame it all on the government is more than a bit unfair.

 

Want it fixed? Pay more in. You'd bleat though, right?

[keyboarder]

Re Keyboarder comments

Well , what a grim facist, prejudiced, ageist attitude!! must check the departments paperwork to see if there was a "too old lets give them a grant for a coffin only, tick box". She is moving back into her drafty cold old property because she wants to and she is a lively independent 83 year old and that's her right. Between our family we are helping her without the governments grant system to do this. She and my dad both served the Island during the war, some attitude eh!!

 

Make your mind up - has she sought a loan or a grant? And if the latter couldn't she reapply after moving back in if that was the issue preventing her from previously qualifying?

[Moghrey Mie]

Homeowners are urged to apply for home improvement grants by Douglas MHK John Shimmin.

 

Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7334439.stm

 

 

What about landlords who are renting out properties that need insulation?

 

Can they apply for these grants too or do you have to live in the place yourself?

[motormouth mabel]

Make your mind up - has she sought a loan or a grant? And if the latter couldn't she reapply after moving back in if that was the issue preventing her from previously qualifying?

 

its a grant, and yes she is applying when she moves back in. But the point has been totally missed, she is elderly and it would be preferable that the work was done prior so she isnt living in a drafty builders yard, but they wont allow that!