# Is somebody already in receipt of a Pension entitled to claim the State Pension



## The Wexican (12 Mar 2009)

If somebody is already receiving a pension, do they also qualify for the State Pension?  The individual in particular retired over 10 years ago and never claimed it.  If he was entitled to it would it backdated?

Any thoughts would be much appreciated


----------



## Protocol (12 Mar 2009)

If they meet the 3 conditions, then they may get a State pension:

In order to qualify for a State Pension (Contributory) you must be aged 66 and have enough Class A, E, F,G, H, N or S social insurance contributions.
You need to: 

Have paid social insurance contributions before a certain age
Have a certain number of social insurance contributions paid and
Have a certain average number over the years since you first started to pay.
*Paid insurance before a certain age*

You must have entered social insurance before a certain age. For people currently under 66, they must have started to pay social insurance before the age of 56. The age limit is higher for people born before 1922. 
*Entry into insurance*

Your _entry into insurance_ means the date on which you first started to pay social insurance. 
The rules that determine when you entered into insurance are quite complex for those with mixed insurance, that is, full social insurance for some of the time and modified at other times. 
Normally the date of starting insurable employment is taken as the date of the first paid employment contribution. However for a person who has a mixture of full and modified rate contributions and paid his/her first full-rate employment contribution before 6 April 1991, the most favourable date of starting insurable employment is taken. This means, if you first started to pay full insurance before 6 April 1991 and before you reached 56 years of age, your entry into insurance can be the date on which you first started to pay the full-rate of insurance if that would be to your advantage. 
If you started to pay full insurance after 6 April 1991, your entry into insurance is the time you first paid any social insurance. 
There are also special entry into insurance rules for self-employed people. If you started to pay self-employed contributions on 6 April 1988 and had previously paid employee insurance at any time, then the date of entry into insurance can be either 6 April 1988 or the date on which you actually first paid insurance, whichever is to your advantage.
*Number of paid contributions*

If you reached pension age before April 6 2002, you must have 156 qualifying paid contributions (a total of 3 years but they do not have to be consecutive). This means that you must have actually paid full-rate contributions (that is, full stamp prior to 1979 and Class A,E,F,G,H,N and S since then.) 
If you reach pension age on or after 6th April 2002, you will need to have 260 paid contributions (effectively 5 years contributions but they need not be consecutive). However, if you were a voluntary contributor on or before April 6 1997, you need only have 156 paid contributions if you have a yearly average of at least 20 contributions. 
If you reach pension age on or after April 6 2012, you will need to have 520 paid contributions (10 years paid contributions). In this case, not more than 260 of the 520 contributions may be voluntary contributions. However, if you were a voluntary contributor on or before April 6 1997 and you have a yearly average of 10 contributions, you may meet the requirement if you have a total of 520 contributions, but only 156 need to be compulsory paid contributions.
*Pre-1953 contributions*

In some cases, contributions paid before 1953 into the then National Insurance Scheme may be taken into account in order to satisfy the requirement that you have 156 paid contributions. In fact, each 2 such contributions are counted as 3. But, if they are taken into account, the average must be measured from 1953. There is a special pro-rate pension for people with pre-1953 contributions.
*Average number contributions per year*

You must meet the average condition. This is probably the most complex aspect of qualifying for a State Pension (Contributory).
*Normal average rule*

The normal average rule states that you must have a yearly average of at least 10 appropriate contributions paid or credited from the year you first entered insurance or from 1953, whichever is later. An average of 10 entitles you to a minimum pension; you need an average of 48 to get the maximum pension.
*Alternative average rule*

This alternative average only applies to people who reach pension age on or after 6 April 1992. 
It requires that you have an average of 48 Class A, E, F, G, H, N or S contributions (paid or credited ) for each contribution year from April 1979 to the April before your 66th birthday. This average would entitle you to the maximum pension. There is no provision for a reduced pension when this alternative average is used.
So, if you reach the age of 66 on or after April 6 1992, your average will be looked at in two ways - the usual average will be assessed and the alternative average will be assessed. Most employed or formerly employed people will be able to meet the alternative average. The alternative average will probably be looked at first because it is easier to assess. If you do not have an average of 48 contributions from 1979 then the usual method of assessing the average will be looked at and you may get a reduced pension (if you do not meet the alternative average, it is virtually impossible for you to have an average of 48 using the normal average rule).


----------



## Black Sheep (14 Mar 2009)

The fact that he has a pension (I assume you mean an occupational pension) will not of itself disqualify him. Of course he can have both if he qualifies.
The qualifying conditions are laid out clearly above.

If he already has already a public service pension it is unlikely he would qualify unless he had some years of private employment. 

*Rule of thumb* - if in doubt apply anyhow


----------



## Willowchase (18 Mar 2009)

Hi Protocol. Very comprehensive response. You obviously know your subject well. Perhaps you can advise on my situation.

Having been 'retired' at the age of 58 after over 39 years in full time employment i.e. 52 contributions per annum from 1967 to 2006 will I qualify for a state pension of any kind at the age of 66?


----------



## Black Sheep (19 Mar 2009)

Are you signing for credits at present. If not your pension may be reduced.

You need a yearly average of 48 PRSI contributions (from the date you first entered employment to your 66th birthday) to obtain a full pension.

A yearly average of between 20 and 47 contributions will give you a 98% pension


----------



## Willowchase (19 Mar 2009)

Yes, I am signing on at present, but was hoping that it would not be necessary to do so for the next six years. In the present circumstances the chances of finding any meaningful employment is minimal. Signing on seems to be a bit of a charade.


----------



## Protocol (20 Mar 2009)

My "comprehensive" response was a copy and paste job from www.welfare.ie


----------



## Black Sheep (20 Mar 2009)

You do not *need* to be looking for work once you are age 55 or over you simply sign for credits to keep a full record intact.

You only need to sign once a year. Talk to you local SW


----------



## Willowchase (23 Mar 2009)

Thanks Black Sheep. I must talk to them next time I sign on.


----------



## Stronge (28 Mar 2009)

I do not think that it is correct to say that you only have to sign on "once a year".  My friend who is 61 has to go in and sign on each week.  I think that may have been in the case previously but not any more. In the area which he lives in the old Social Welfare office closed and a new one built during that timethat it was being built  he did not have to sign on at all for credits but as soon as the new office opened he was told that he had to sign on each week. Initially he had thought it would be once a year but the lady in the office said he had to sign on each week.  As he is not getting weekly benefit and I am sure there are many people like him would it not be better to sign on yearly and this would  keep  some people out of the Soc/Wel offices and this would help to reduce some of the very   long q's.


----------



## Welfarite (30 Mar 2009)

Stronge said:


> I do not think that it is correct to say that you only have to sign on "once a year". My friend who is 61 has to go in and sign on each week. I think that may have been in the case previously but not any more. In the area which he lives in the old Social Welfare office closed and a new one built during that timethat it was being built he did not have to sign on at all for credits but as soon as the new office opened he was told that he had to sign on each week. Initially he had thought it would be once a year but the lady in the office said he had to sign on each week. As he is not getting weekly benefit and I am sure there are many people like him would it not be better to sign on yearly and this would keep some people out of the Soc/Wel offices and this would help to reduce some of the very long q's.


 

This sounds very odd. Even if he was getting paid every week, he would only have to sign once in four weeks! He should question this....the only reason I can think of is that he was under investigation or something, but even then, it should not be a requirement to sign weekly indefinitely.


----------



## Black Sheep (30 Mar 2009)

Perhaps your friend is not telling you the whole story. 
As welfarite has already said he has never heard of anyone signing on *every* week and neither have I.
There is something else going on here that you are not aware of


----------



## Swallows (30 Mar 2009)

Hi,
 What the poster is referring to above is the pre retirement which people used to be able to take at age 55. Note that I said used to? That was stopped a year or so ago when times were good and there were plenty of jobs about. On pre retirement people didn't need to sign on and were asked to sign a form once a year to say their circumstances hadn't changed. I know a few people who are on this. It may well be that it will be reintroduced again to get people off the live register.


----------



## Welfarite (31 Mar 2009)

Swallows said:


> Hi,
> What the poster is referring to above is the pre retirement which people used to be able to take at age 55. Note that I said used to? That was stopped a year or so ago when times were good and there were plenty of jobs about. On pre retirement people didn't need to sign on and were asked to sign a form once a year to say their circumstances hadn't changed. I know a few people who are on this. It may well be that it will be reintroduced again to get people off the live register.


 
Why are you definite that it is Pre-retirement? I dofn't think so.  The poster specifically mentions credits and that the person is not getting paid.


----------



## Swallows (31 Mar 2009)

Hi, If Black Sheep is not talking about Pre re tirement allowance perhaps he can come back and tell us how you can retire at 55 and not have to sign on? There would be a big take up on that one. Maybe the poster was in the Guards and has a pension, I dont know there could be any number of scenarious.


----------



## Welfarite (31 Mar 2009)

Swallows said:


> Hi, If Black Sheep is not talking about Pre re tirement allowance perhaps he can come back and tell us how you can retire at 55 and not have to sign on? There would be a big take up on that one. Maybe the poster was in the Guards and has a pension, I dont know there could be any number of scenarious.


 

I don't quite understand where you're coming from on this.I don't see any comment from Blacksheep about retiring and not having to sign on.


----------

