Tag: ROS ALTMANN

  • Pension Fraud Tax Epidemic

    Pension Fraud Tax Epidemic

    Coronavirus is a terrifying epidemic – just as the scamming and taxing of pension savers is an epidemic of equally-devastating proportions. Governments across the globe are putting in place extraordinary measures to stop the spread of Covid 19. Yet the British government, regulators and law enforcers have achieved nothing in terms of rescuing existing and preventing future pension scam victims.

    Boris Johnson’s government has proved that laws can be changed overnight when necessary. All it needs is the recognition of the reason for the law change. Yet nothing has been done in ten years to change laws relating to pension scams, unauthorised payment charges and accompanying devasting financial consequences for victims.

    Hopeless, lazy and inept pensions ministers have failed to tackle pension scams for a decade

    Britain has had a series of no-hoper pensions ministers. “Pensions minister” seems to be a position where peculiar people are stuck in – as square pegs in round holes – so they are out of the way and can’t do too much damage (as in challenging the government over its shameful failure to tackle pension scams).

    As the Coronavirus crisis escalates, millions of people will face financial hardship. Businesses will fold; jobs will be lost; pensions and investments will collapse. But HMRC will keep scrambling to tax the victims they caused in the first place – heaping more financial misery on victims whose pensions have been stolen.

    Causes of pension scams must be thoroughly understood in order to recognise what must be done:

    • HMRC registers occupational pension schemes – even though there is no sponsoring employer which either employs anybody – or which exists at all
    • The Pensions Regulator registers occupational schemes – knowing the registrant is a serial scammer
    • HMRC keeps QROPS on the list even they know they are running outright scams and operating liberation
    • HMRC and tPR fail to warn ceding providers and the public when they suspect (or have evidence of) fraud
    • Ceding providers hand over £ millions to obvious pension scams without carrying out any due diligence
    • Serial scammers are left free to keep on scamming as the police, the SFO and the Insolvency Service do nothing effective to put them behind bars
    • Pensions and Treasury ministers do nothing to halt the avalanche of scams and the taxing of the victims
    • Opportunistic scammers in the UK and offshore devise ever-more crafty ways of relieving victims of their pensions

    HMRC’s negligent role in pension scams is clearly illustrated in both the Ark and Salmon Enterprises cases. In 2010 and 2011, HMRC knew full well what the scammers – Stephen Ward and James Lau were up to. They met with Ark’s Stephen Ward and his pensions lawyer associate Alan Fowler in February 2011. HMRC also opened an enquiry into the schemes – but didn’t suspend the registration to stop them from attracting still more victims. At the time of their February 2011 meeting with Ward and Fowler, there was £7 million in the Ark schemes. By the time Dalriada was appointed, there was a further £20 million.

    Between April and September 2010, HMRC had the administrators of the Salmon Enterprises arrested on suspicion of fraud – yet still they did not suspend the scheme or warn the public or ceding providers. During this period – and right up until well into 2011 – Salmon Enterprises remained a “valid” pension scheme with a PSTR registration number and nothing was done to stop more victims (such as Mr. R below) from being scammed out of their pensions.

    There’s been well-meaning talk of an “amnesty” for fraud victims. But the problem is that won’t work unless fraud can be proven. And the British authorities have proved themselves to be inept and disinterested when it comes to convicting known fraudsters. It has been left to the Spanish criminal courts to charge Stephen Ward and Paul Clarke with fraud as there’s been no movement in the UK.

    In Britain, however, the scammers mostly just carry on unchallenged. Even a police officer can’t get the police to prosecute; Action Fraud takes no action; Project Bloom is meaningless and does nothing; the FCA is a bad joke and the government couldn’t care less.

    Below is a summary by a Salmon Enterprises victim of his appalling case. He has asked his MP to refer this to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. Hopefully both the MP and the ombudsman will do their jobs properly and get this sickening epidemic resolved once and for all. All the perpetrators (not just the scammers themselves but also HMRC and tPR – as well as the series of pensions and treasury ministers who have all failed in their duty to address this issue) need to be sanctioned. Most important of all, measures need to be put in place to prevent the same thing from happening again – that is what Mr. R and all his fellow victims want.

    SALMON ENTERPRISES/TUDOR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT PENSION SCAM AND TAX PENALTY – by Mr. R:

    “I had a National Grid and a CSC final salary pension scheme, after 35 years of service, which together totalled £528,447.25.

    I was scammed out of these pensions into the bogus Salmon Enterprises occupational scheme, which was registered by HMRC and tPR, by an FCA-regulated adviser (now under investigation by the Insolvency Service for fraud) in June 2011. I took out less than the 25% legally allowed after my 55th birthday. I’ve been forced to pay £37,956.79 in unauthorised payment tax by HMRC.

    TIMELINE:

    • 28/8/09 – Salmon Enterprises occupational pension scheme registered by HMRC and tPR with Tudor Capital Management – TCML – (run by directors Andrew Meeson and Peter Bradley) as administrators.
    • 07/4/10 – FSA wrote to tPR announcing a criminal investigation into Meeson, Bradley and TCML. HMRC wrote to tPR stating arrest warrants issued for TCML directors
    • 08/4/10 – CPS obtained worldwide asset restraint order against TCML director Peter Spencer Bradley.
    • 08/4/10 – tPR met to decide to suspend TCML as trustees/administrators.
    • 29/4/10 – Peter & Alison Bradley (TCML directors) arrested on suspicion of fraud, money laundering and cheating the public revenue – although not for cheating the public.
    • 30/4/10 – HMRC wrote to tPR with evidence of criminal investigation
    • 07/9/10 – Andrew Meeson (TCML director) arrested
    • 28/2/11 – HMRC wrote to tPR with details of ongoing criminal investigation, arrests made, draft report of offences and evidence submitted to Crown Court.
    • February 2011 – no warnings placed in public domain and HMRC refused to comment when asked by ceding providers to comment on the arrest and criminal investigation of the scheme administrators
    • May 2011 – I was introduced to IFA James Lau of Wightman Fletcher McCabe – FCA Reg 185570 – by two existing Salmon Enterprises members who had been offered commissions by James Lau for the introduction of new members
    • May 2011 – James Lau confirmed the scheme was registered by HMRC but did not inform me the administrators were under investigation for fraud
    • June 2011 – Tudor Capital Management sent transfer documents to national Grid and CSC.
    • June 2011 – National Grid transferred £454,647.25 and CSC transferred £73,800 to TCML – asking no questions about the provenance of the scheme, or directors/administrators or whether liberation was involved/intended
    • June 2011 – neither ceding provider checked the receiving scheme was bona fide before transferring £528,447.25
    • June 2011 – while HMRC and tPR were investigating Tudor Capital Management for fraud, neither did anything to warn ceding providers or the public
    • June 2011 – HMRC received a query from one suspicious ceding provider relating to Salmon Enterprises. HMRC’s Leigh Hands responded by quoting the registration number of the scheme – and gave no further details or warnings
    • June 2011 – HMRC received a second query from the same suspicious ceding provider seeking further clarification: “My concern is based on the fact that an article appeared in the pensions press on 21 October 2010 stating: Four people connected with TCML have been arrested on suspicion of fraud, cheating the public revenue and money laundering”.
    • HMRC responded: “I am unable to disclose any information regarding TCML due to our strict rules on confidentiality”. The transfer went ahead. And this was prior to my transfers going ahead on 15th July 2011 and 12th August 2011.
    • 31/01/2012 and 1/03/2012 – £49,072 was released from my pension fund – approximately 9.3% of the fund value – after my 55th birthday (16/12/2011)
    • February 2013 – Received annual statement from the Salmon Enterprises scheme.
    • April 2015 – Received a tax assessment from HMRC claiming my £49,072 did not constitute a “valid” PCLS (Pension Commencement Lump Sum).
    • April 2015 – HMRC assessed me on a further £30,000 which I never received
    • March 2016 – Engaged Ms A. Brooks of Pension Life as my agent to appeal the tax assessment. The appeal went to the Tax Tribunals and did not succeed.
    • February 2020 – Paid in full the £37,956.79 tax assessment.

    The remainder of my pension built up after a lifetime’s work – £479,375 – has been stolen by James Lau. I am not aware of any effort being made by any British authority to recover it.” 

    This personal account of the fraud committed against Mr. R raises a number of serious questions:

    1. Why did neither HMRC nor tPR suspend the registration of the Salmon Enterprises scheme in April 2010 when the criminal investigation into the trustees was first launched – to prevent victims such as Mr. R from being scammed?
    2. Why did tPR’s Determinations Panel not even bother to have a meeting until October 2011 to “consider” whether to use special procedures? They had known about suspected criminal activity in the Salmon Enterprises scheme since early 2010 – 18 months earlier.
    3. Why did the investigation into suspected fraud against the “Public Revenue” not extend to an urgent investigation into the “fraud against the public“?
    4. After the State was reasonably prompt with the investigation, prosecution and jailing of Andrew Meeson and Peter Bradley, why was James Lau – the FCA-registered adviser who promoted and operated the Salmon Enterprises scheme – not simultaneously investigated, prosecuted and jailed?
    5. Why didn’t the Pensions Regulator place the Salmon Enterprises scheme into the hands of a competent independent trustee immediately the fraud was suspected? Since 2011, there is no evidence that any effort has been made by any party to recover the £ millions stolen by James Lau, Andrew Meeson and Peter Bradley
    6. Why has no pensions minister since 2010 raised any questions on the issues relating to the multiple failures of HMRC and tPR in the case of Tudor Capital Management and Salmon Enterprises? (Or, indeed, in the case of dozens of other pension scams). This shameful and negligent failure falls squarely on the shoulders of them all: Steve Webb; Iain Duncan-Smith; Ros Altman; Stephen Crabb; Damian Green; David Gauke; Esther McVey; Amber Rudd, Therese Coffey and Guy Opperman.

    The shame of the above lazy, incompetent bunch of ministerial failures in charge of Britain’s pensions must also extend to three prime ministers: David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson. None of them have done anything about pension fraud – or even shown the slightest interest in intending to tackle it – beyond empty promises.

    All the same questions raised about Tudor Capital Management and Salmon Enterprises must also be asked about the Ark scam. HMRC knew that Craig Tweedley and Stephen Ward and Co were operating and promoting what was probably pension liberation in the summer of 2010. Yet nothing was done until nearly 500 people had fallen victim to the scam and faced hefty losses and tax liabilities – as well as an agonising wait of at least ten years to find out their eventual fate and get a sniff of closure on this shameful episode.

    In order to get a tax amnesty for fraud, there have to be investigations and convictions for fraud. The new trustees, Dalriada – appointed by tPR in May 2011 – didn’t feel it was “in their remit” to report the perps for fraud.

    And so Craig Tweedley, Amanda Clarke, Andrew Hields, Andrew Isles, Geoff Mills, Jeremy Dening, Julian Hanson, Mark Ainsworth, Mark Tweedley, Michael Rotherforth, Stephen Ward, Richard Davies, Stephen Tennent, George Frost, Gary Collin, Anthony Salih, Paul Clarke and Alan Fowler remain at large. Not one of them has ever been brought to justice.

    It may be that while some of the above players in the Ark scam were more guilty than others, it is a matter of record that Stephen Ward was the most prolific of all those flogging Ark and the “MPVA” reciprocal loan arrangement. Ward sold more than a third of the whole fund at £10,693,332 worth of transfers – followed by Julian Hanson at £5,330,525 and Jeremy Dening at £2,216,720. Dalriada’s failure to have any of these players investigated for fraud is shameful. It is also utterly astonishing that Andrew Isles – an accountant – was still flogging Ark even after he knew HMRC was sniffing around and that he was condemning his own clients to an unauthorised payment tax charge.

    It is also a matter of record that Craig Tweedley, Stephen Ward, Alan Fowler and Andrew Isles continued operating and promoting Ark months after HMRC expressed their unease and suspicions – making no effort to stop the promotion and operation of the Ark schemes.

    There are many questions to be asked about both the Salmon Enterprises and Ark scams. It would be good to think that complaints by the victims to their MPs will result in a bulk complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. It would also be wonderful to think that an amnesty for fraud victims would be possible, but the question remains: who is going to have the fraudsters prosecuted? Dalriada Trustees says it is “watching with the interest” the prosecution of Stephen Ward and Paul Clarke for fraud (on an entirely different case involving an unconnected scam in Spain). But this purported “interest” has yet to become intense enough to provoke a simple phone call to ask how it is all going (or how they could do the same thing themselves).

    I still wish that tPR had appointed an independent trustee to the Salmon Enterprises scheme. All the victims – such as Mr. R – would also like to know the answer to that burning question. But they are also painfully aware that tPR-appointed independent trusteeship isn’t without its own problems. In the Ark case, Dalriada has taken far more money out of the funds than the scammers ever did, and the members still to this day – after nine years – don’t have a sniff of ever getting their pension funds transferred into a proper pension scheme. But at least they know that what little is left is “relatively” safe and the only risk to it is the possibility of another nine years of Dalriada at the helm and another £7 million being spent on trustees’ and legal fees.

    Mr. R is in contact with some other victims of the Salmon Enterprises scam. They are all planning on submitting summaries and complaints to their MPs and asking them to refer the matter to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. Ark victims have tried contacting their MPs and pensions ministers for many years, but not one single MP or minister has ever engaged with the process of an ombudsman complaint against HMRC and tPR. Perhaps that will now change – as all MPs and ministers are now working from home and will no longer have to spend so much time travelling to and from the House of Commons.

    Coronavirus has taught us an important lesson: the law must be about safety and justice – and must be changed quickly when a crisis arises. Pension fraud has been an epidemic for ten years – and now the law must finally be changed QUICKLY so that the perpetrators of pension scams are brought to justice.

  • As Easy as A Zero Tolerance approach to pension scams

    altmann_ros

    Zero Tolerance approach to pension scams

    It is rare for me to want to copy somebody else’s work, but Dalriada Trustees’ Neil Copeland wrote a very good piece on 20th December 2016 about three “hurricanes” which hit us this year: Altmann, Brexit and Trump.  With an astonishing degree of imaginative and creative inspiration, Neil referred to this as being “as easy as A, B, T”.

    http://dalriadatrustees.co.uk/archives/2016-as-easy-as-a-b-t-altmann-brexit-trump/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DalriadaTrustees+%28Dalriada+Trustees%29

    It is probably fair to agree that Brexit and Trump came into the “cataclysmic tsunami” category when considering what possible effect both of these surprises might have on pensions.  I think the answer is probably a resounding “don’t know”, but we do all – of course – hope it will be good, positive and helpful.  Maybe even some of George Osborne’s dreadful “freedoms” damage might be repaired?

    I particularly liked Neil’s quote that “one of the reasons Trump ran for president was that he was sick and tired of people laughing at America”   The interesting parallel, of course, is that victims of pension and investment scams are sick and tired of the pension scammers laughing at regulators and law enforcement in the UK and offshore.

    Neil also observed that Brexit may have been a bit of a surprise, but now nobody has a “Scooby” what the eventual end result will be.  (Least of all the British government!).  While we are used to our country being run by incompetent ditherers, we must all hope that Neil is right when he says there are some clear post-referendum messages for pension trustees and that these comprise of understanding liabilities, investments, sponsors covenants and developments.  What Neil failed to do, of course, is mention that the offshore trustees in traditionally dodgy jurisdictions such as Malta, Gibraltar and Guernsey, will have a jolly good chuckle at this prediction.  They will undoubtedly continue to ignore regulatory and due diligence obligations as they accept business from unregulated chiringuitos and see low-risk investors put into high-risk, toxic, illiquid funds that benefit nobody except the scammers.

    Interestingly, Neil tackled the three hurricanes in reverse order, with A for Altmann coming last.  He felt sure the red Baronness was a “lovely person” but believed she had undermined the credibility of the role of pensions minister.  He reminded us that she had repeatedly refused to do anything about pension scams, referred to the victims as “fools” and claimed banning cold calling was too difficult.  She also claimed it was “officials” who stopped her from banning cold calling (presumably the same officials who told her she couldn’t help the WASPI victims?).  Perhaps Ros simply didn’t have a “Scooby” how to do it – and anyway preferred drawing pretty-coloured boxes.  Altmann was subsequently quoted as saying that it was unacceptable to say the government couldn’t bring in a cold-calling ban.  She clearly feels happier being outside the tent.

    Neil commented that now the Government has announced it is going to ban pensions cold calling, perhaps Ros feels a little silly.  And if she does have the grace to feel humility for her failure maybe Richard Harrington will take up the challenge of undoing the damage she has done to the image of the pensions minister’s role.

    I think 2017 will have to focus on many challenges faced by Britain and the rest of the world.  But for the sake of British citizens everywhere, I hope Brexit and Trump will result in some positive developments for the pensions and investment world.  I also hope that Harrington and the whole of the DWP will at last take seriously their obligations to sort this unholy mess out once and for all.  We need a ZERO TOLERANCE APPROACH and must stop fannying about with weak regulation which is not fit for purpose.

    I hope everyone who is interested in helping rescuing the pension industry and pension scam victims will respond to the government consultation:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pension-scams/pensions-scams-consultation

    I also hope that all concerned will explain to the government that regulatory and law enforcement failures have led to many scammers repeatedly coming up with new ways of making fortunes out of victims and fools out of regulators.  The chiringuitos have profitably built up huge portfolios of ruined British citizens in the UK and are now happily scamming away offshore with help from firms in Gibraltar, Malta and the Cayman Islands.  Zero tolerance is now the only option.

     

     

  • WASPI Debate in Parliament 7th January 2016 With Mhairi Black

    WASPI Debate in Parliament 7th January 2016 With Mhairi Black

    Parliament debated the WASPI issue at the beginning of 2016.  The culmination of months of hard work by the WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) campaigners finally arrived on 7th January 2016. Mhairi Black (SNP MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South) asked the Government to introduce “transitional arrangements” to help the hundreds of thousands of women suffering hardship as a result of the State Pension aged being raised from 60 to 66. It was never the campaigners’ case that the age should not have been raised at all – but that those women affected (born in the 1950’s) should have had proper notice to plan their finances and their retirement.

    http://on.fb.me/1XazD71

    Mhairi Black raises the Pension Equalisation Issue in Parliament on the 7th Jan 2016

    Mhairi Black Raises the Pension Equalisation Debate in Parliament on the 7th Jan 2016

    The surprise star of the show was the highly articulate and passionate Mhairi Black – aged just 21. With just eight months’ experience of being an MP, she shone out as a real champion of not just her own constituents, but all the WASPI’s who are victims of what was described as a “mess” caused by a succession of governments. This mess failed to communicate the raising of the State Pension age to those affected – either quickly enough or at all. Many women received contradictory notices from the DWP about when they could collect their pension and some received nothing. The resulting chaos is hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of women facing severe poverty, stress, physical and emotional health issues and relationship problems.  Mhaira Black stated that these victims had been “shafted” by the government.

    The Pension Minister has no action for WASPI
    Ros Altmann: no intention of doing anything to help the WASPIs.

    Another surprise in this issue has been the attitude of Ros Altmann who once “championed” the cause of women pensioners – even marching in the streets with them dressed as an “ordinary” woman. However, since being made Baroness and appointed Pensions Minister, her tune has changed from public-spirited enthusiasm to outright apathy at best – and total betrayal of WASPI victims at worst. The rest of the government has been no better – completely refusing to acknowledge the plight of the women affected.

    Steve Webb previous pension minister admitted coalition governement badly delivered pension equalisation
    Steve Webb previous Pension Minister – “bad decision made by the government based on a poor briefing”

    Interestingly, former Pensions Minister Steve Webb, has admitted that the Coalition government did mess up pretty badly – both with the decisions and changes and with the way these were communicated to those affected. However, while claiming this was caused by the government not being “properly briefed” he also put much of the blame on the previous Labour government under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.Coalition Government brought in Pension Equalisation

     

    The opposition side of the House was not only pretty full but also full of praise and admiration for Mhairi Black and the WASPI campaigners – many of whom were sitting in the gallery watching the proceedings. However, it was evident that few Conservative MP’s felt this was an important enough issue to attend the House of Commons – as only two of them turned up at the start of the debate. By the end, this had dribbled up to five. The disgrace of this apathy by the Conservatives was repeatedly noted.

    Shadow Pensions Minister, Nick Thomas-Symonds WASPI Supporter
    Shadow Pensions Minister, Nick Thomas-Symonds

    Shadow Pensions Minister, Nick Thomas-Symonds, spoke in a powerful and compelling manner about the injustice of the situation addressed by the WASPI campaign.  All those who heard him also heard a man of principle who will make an excellent champion for the millions of victims of pension problems in the UK.

    By “champion”, I refer not just to the State Pension “mess” but also to the thousands of victims of pension scams who are facing poverty in retirement in the long term, and financial ruin in the short term at the hands of HMRC. Between 2010 and 2015 there were numerous pension liberation schemes set up, run and promoted by fraudsters who assured victims they could get “loans” from their personal and occupational pensions in a way that “exploited” tax law loopholes and that there would be no tax liabilities to pay. This has resulted in thousands of tax demands of 55% of the money “borrowed” from the pension funds – known as HMRC’s “unauthorised payment” charges.

    Pension Debate
    George Osbourne

    Sadly, it is statistically inevitable that there will be some unfortunate women who are victims of both situations i.e. WASPIs who have also been scammed out of their personal or occupational pensions and will be forced to pay 55% tax charges by HMRC. The Ark Class Action (including victims of not just Ark but also Capita Oak, Evergreen, Salmon Enterprises, London Quantum and other pension liberation scams) has tried to address the tax position with the Government. The object of the exercise was to try to negotiate a tax “amnesty” for victims who were assured by the fraudsters (one of which was a government consultant) that their “loans” were legal and tax compliant.

    Iain Duncan-Smith
    Iain Duncan-Smith

    The Secretary of the Ark Class Action met with her MP, Iain Duncan-Smith – also Work and Pensions Secretary – to raise the matter. He agreed it was an unfair situation and promised to organise a meeting with Chancellor George Osborne and Treasury Secretary David Gauke at the end of 2014. He took the Ark victim’s entire case file and assured her he would get back to her. That was the last she heard from him, and her case file mysteriously “disappeared”.

    WASPI
    WASPI: Women Against State Pension Inequality Campaign

    I have been tremendously inspired by the WASPI campaign, and impressed with the support provided by MP’s and leading journalists such as Paul Lewis and Jeff Prestridge. I hope this will lead to similar support being given to the Ark Class Action – as there is much to be learned from the WASPI founders’ approach. What WASPI and ACA have in common, of course, is they both represent a group of decent, honest, hard-working people who have been victims of injustice and whose interests are being ignored by the present government.

    Pension Equalisation Debate
    House of Commons

    Journalists have often asked me whether I was myself a victim of pension liberation fraud, and sometimes I have felt almost ashamed to admit that I am not, and that by definition I cannot talk with first-hand experience of the pain and distress suffered by the victims. However, I am a WASPI having been born in late 1954 and so can attest to the fact that I have NEVER received any notification from the DWP about the change in my State Pension entitlement date.

     

    Those who watched the debate on television will have seen and heard the passion of so many MP’s who have constituents affected by the WASPI problem. Viewers may also have noticed the pathetic turn out by Conservative MP’s – suggesting not just apathy but complete contempt for the matter. I myself noticed the blond woman sitting next to Shailesh Vara who couldn’t stop yawning while he was talking. I guess it must be pretty boring and exhausting listening to a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department for Work and Pensions trying – and failing – to defend the indefensible.

    Pension Equalisation Debate
    Shailesh Vara

    Unsurprisingly, the motion was carried by 158 to nil (the government didn’t even both to vote) – but there is no obligation by the government to do anything about the WASPI situation.

    STATEMENTS (SMALL SELECTION) MADE BY MP’S DURING THE DEBATE

    Mhairi Black (Paisley and Renfrewshire South – SNP): The 1995 Act increased the SP age for women from 60 to 65 to equalize the pension age so that women retired at the same age as men. The Turner Commission recommended that 15 years’ notice be given to individuals if their pension arrangements were to change to give them adequate time to respond appropriately. The changes were not to be brought in until 2010 which technically gave women 15 years’ notice. The problem is that nobody knew about that. As late as 2008, fewer than half of women knew that they would be affected. The National Centre for Social Research stated in 2011 that only 43% of women were aware of the planned change. Even the previous Pensions Minister, Steve Webb, recognised that not everybody knew that the changes had happened in the 1995 Act. Paul Lewis, financial journalist, told us that after researching he could barely find any reporting of the issue at all in 1995.

    A response to a Freedom of Information request states that the Department eventually wrote to individuals affected and that “Mail campaigns took place between 2009 and 2013.” That is 14 years after the 1995 Act. Women were not personally notified by anybody official until 14 years after the changes came in. That is 14 fewer years that women have had to prepare and to try to make alternative arrangements.

    But when giving evidence to the Work and Pensions Committee, financial journalist Paul Lewis told us that after researching this himself he could barely find any reporting of the issue at all in 1995. There were a few small press cuttings from the business pages at the back of some newspapers. A freedom of information request revealed that the Government did fund “broader” awareness campaigns, which ran in waves between 2001 and 2004, but that these campaigns “did not focus on equalisation in particular”. In fact, only one of the press adverts in those campaigns was focused on this issue—one press cutting roughly seven years after this had already been passed into law. It is quite evident that this whole thing became a total mess. I do not know whether it was not reported deliberately, for political reasons or fear of ramifications, or whether it was a genuine accident, but what I do know is that women were not notified. It was not reported and they were not given enough time to be able to make appropriate arrangements. This brings us on to the Pensions Act 2007, which increased the equalised state pension age from 65 to 66 between 2024 and 2026. It gave all affected people 17 years’ notice. That is fair enough, but then the Pensions Act 2011 came along and said, “Forget the 17 years’ notice, we’re going to rush this through. We need to do this right now.” The 2011 Act accelerated pension age equalisation for women and the subsequent increase to 66, effective from October 2016 onwards, meaning that affected women had only five years’ notice to try to remedy life plans that had been in place for years.

    Geraint Davies (Swansea West) (Lab/Co-op): The hon. Lady is making an excellent speech and I welcome the debate she has brought to the House. Does she agree that many of these women have had a lifetime of low and unequal pay in low-paid jobs? They have had broken careers, because they have brought up children. Some may have got divorced or separated. Their whole life plan has been disrupted, destroyed and impoverished by this awful change.

    Mhairi Black: I could not agree more with the hon. Gentleman. The 2011 Act made women wait an extra year to a year-and-a-half to claim their state pension. However, we have to remember and take into account the context that women did not know about the initial 1995 Act. We have a situation where there is a whole host of women who read about the 2011 Act and went, “Oh, God. Okay, I am going to have to be working an extra two years. I’d better start making plans. Oh no, wait a minute, I’m working till I’m 66. Where did that come from?” There is a whole host of women who have been given a double whammy. The Government have not and are not giving women enough time to prepare alternative plans. There have to be better transitional arrangements.

    The Conservative ethos is to encourage independence and responsible choice, but how can that happen if we do not give people the time to make the responsible choices? By continuing this policy at such a high speed, the Government are knowingly and deliberately placing another burden on women who are already trying to deal with consequences of an Act passed 21 years ago that they have only now found out about. To put that into context, I am 21—that’s how old this is. One of my constituents told me that she began working at 17 and chose to pay the full rate of national insurance on the basis that she would retire at 60. Other options were available to her, but she said, “I want to retire at 60 so I’ll pay the price, through national insurance, my whole working life.” She put it in a way that I think is a very good and accurate description of what is happening. She has now found out that she is not retiring until she is 66. She says: “The coalition and this present Government have stripped us of our pensions with no prior warning and with no regard to the contract we all entered when we were 17.” She uses the term “contract”. That is an important point, because pensions are not benefits; they are a contract. People enter into them on the basis that if they pay x amount of national insurance they will receive y at a certain age.

    The Government have said: “The policy decision to increase women’s state pension age is designed to remove the inequality between men and women.” That is a strange definition of equality: I am being shafted and short-changed purely because of when I was born and because I am a woman. That is not my definition of equality.

    Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con): I congratulate Mhairi Black on leading today’s debate, for which there is an extraordinary turnout, showing the considerable interest of so many Members in this subject. I was approached by several constituents who said they were going to be disadvantaged. I recorded a short podcast on the subject, which has now been followed by 145,000 people, many of whom have written to me about it—and not just my own constituents either. I want to pay tribute to the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign, which has articulated the case so well in front of the Select Committee. Its petition has now been signed, I believe, by more than 103,000 people. I want to thank the WASPI campaign for the help and support it gave me, not least in telling nonconstituents to write to their own MPs rather than have them all writing to me—and I am exceedingly grateful for that. We all agree with equalisation of the pension age. Large sums of money are involved and difficult decisions have to be made, but it is important that the rule of fairness is applied as much as possible, and it is clear that a sizeable group of women seem to be bearing the brunt of these changes disproportionately.

    I have had representations from constituents who were in low-paid jobs with huge caring responsibilities for children and other family members when they did not have access to free child care and other things—and we have them to thank. Yet it is those people for whom I believe there has been a breach of trust, as these changes hit them disproportionately. We have a large duty of care to them, but I do not think we are going to fulfil it.

     

     

     

     

     

  • WASPI and The Five Blind Men

    The well-written and informative epistles by Frances Coppola, Henry Tapper, Joan Bakewell, Paul Lewis etc., remind me of the tale of the five blind men and the elephant:

     

    “Five blind men stood in a ring around an elephant, and were asked to describe it. Each in turn reached out and touched the animal and declared it to be like a snake; rope; wall; tree and leaf”.

     

    Individually, the blind men were all correct – in their own way. But whatever their perception of the elephant was, the fact remained that the poor beast was in danger of being killed by poachers.

     

    Similarly, whatever each of the commentators’ version of the WASPI issue is, the indisputable fact remains that there will be victims of severe injustice and hardship. You could say that the “elephant in the room” is the fact that this situation should never have arisen in the first place as proper notice should have been given, and that we are only now reading and writing about it due to incompetence/negligence /laziness/arrogance by successive cabinets. (In fact, Steve Webb – former Pensions Minister – suggests the blame lies squarely with Labour; but then he would, wouldn’t he!).

    The Pension Minister has no action for WASPI
    PENSION MINISTER ROS ALTMANN

    WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) has a lot in common with the Ark Class Action (ACA) which I represent. ACA consists of hundreds of victims of pension scams – most of which operated some form of pension liberation fraud between 2010 and 2015. The schemes include Ark, Capita Oak, Westminster, Evergreen, London Quantum and dozens more. Most of the victims have not only lost their personal or occupational pensions (to worthless, toxic investments such as store pods, car parks, eucalyptus plantations and offshore property), but are also facing crippling tax penalties for “liberating” their pensions.

     

    I am no expert on the WASPI matter. But I am impressed with the various eloquent accounts of the history of State Pension Equalisation and technicalities of how National Insurance contributions fund the State pension. However, I am up to speed on pension scams – and it is clear that both situations have exactly the same results: poverty, despair and injustice. The victims of pension scams were told that the Ark/Capita Oak/London Quantum etc. pension schemes they were transferring to were safe because they were registered by HMRC and the Pensions Regulator and were therefore “approved”. They were also told they could get “loans” from their pensions and that there would be no tax implications as these loans legally exploited legitimate tax loopholes. Many WASPI’s, on the other hand, were told nothing by the government – until it was too late to do anything to mitigate the unexpected extra six years they would have to exist without a State pension.

    The government is effectively the trustee of the State Pension and should therefore abide by the same “fit for purpose” standards expected of all pension trustees. British citizens will simply not stand for the State Pension being run on “Ponzi” principles. What worries me is how many pension scam victims are in the WASPI boat – so are likely to drown not once; not twice; but three times at the hands of government incompetence.

     

    What I find hardest to swallow is the claim by the government and various commentators that those affected should have known – or should have taken steps to find out – what their State Pension age was (in plenty of time). Maybe; maybe not. All I can say is that I didn’t know (born November 1954). I have never received any notification from the DWP. Funnily enough, I was at the offices of the DWP on 8th December with two Ark victims – so somebody could have mentioned it to me then (although Ros Altmann was rather too busy hiding and waiting for the security guard to usher us off the premises to say anything very much).

     

    But irrespective of whether I (and all the others in the same boat) knew, should have known, should have checked, were given enough notice etc., the question remains unanswered:

     

    “what are we going to live on for the next six years?”

     

    Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that we did all know jolly well (and had plenty of notice) and now we are joining the WASPI campaign just for the sake of it (bored with knitting clubs): how are we going to eat/live? Some women might be able to work. Some might not for a variety of reasons including health or availability of suitable employment.

     

    I know the argument has been put forward that the WASPI campaign is futile because there is “no money down the back of the sofa” to help victims through the transition period. So, what do we do? Go away quietly and starve? Perhaps Angela Merkel will take us in to save us from cardboard city under the railway arches.

     

    Personally, I think it is all a bit of a shame. We are a significant generation which saw the transition from post-WW2 austerity to the re-building of our nation – to which we all contributed in our different ways. I was a child from an orphanage, lucky enough to be adopted by a father who never spoke about his years in the RN as an Asdic operator and a mother who never spoke about her years in West London as an ambulance driver. And I think I deserve better – as do all the WASPI’s.

     

    I remain perplexed by Ros Altmann’s refusal to engage with the WASPI campaign (or the Ark Class Action – campaigning against pension scams). Is she really just a puppet in the hands of the silver-tongued Iain Duncan-Smith? Or is there a darker force at work? Altmann once marched in the streets in support of pensioners’ rights but is now refusing to acknowledge the injustice of the failure by government to give adequate notice of the change to State Pension age.

     

    Whatever the rights, wrongs, technicalities and “elephantologies” of the WASPI situation are, this government in general – and Ros Altmann/Iain Duncan-Smith et al in particular – are likely to go down in history as the thieves and scoundrels who sold the elephants up the river. Steve Webb – Pensions Minister under the previous Coalition government – has pretty much admitted as much.

    The Waspi in the Room

    The WASPI campaign has collected an impressive 100,000 signatures on the petition to have the issue debated in the House of Commons in a very short period. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/110776

    Indeed, Mhairi Black, MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South, will be raising the matter on Thursday 7th January. The campaign has also succeeded in conducting very effective Facebook and Twitter campaigns and getting press coverage such as the Sunday Post’s one on 3rd January 2016:

     

    https://www.sundaypost.com/news/uk-news/betrayed-by-pension-reforms-thousands-of-women-left-desperate-as-changes-force-them-to-keep-working/

     

    So, back to the elephant in the room: remember when I handed evidence of multi billion pound pension scams to HMRC/government back in June 2014? And nobody (not HMRC; not the Pensions Regulator; not the government) did anything about it? And Police officers and Armed Forces personnel lost their Police and Army pensions to the scammers as a result? Well, I’ve got all the evidence as to where the scammers’ assets are (including one government consultant). So, with just a little effort from the government and HMRC, sufficient tax from serial tax evaders/pension scammers could be collected to facilitate an elegant transition for the WASPI’s without disturbing the sofa at all.

     

    Angie Brooks

    Chairman, Ark Class Action

    www.pension-life.com

     

    WASPI is an action group that was formed by five ordinary women who are personally affected by the changes to the State Pension Age and wanted to do something to address this injustice. WASPI was set up in April 2015 to petition against pension legislation changes in the State Pension Law. Having raised £6,000 via Crowdjustice (the first litigation crowdfunding platform in the UK), in a matter of days WASPI are in the process of establishing if there is a legal case to challenge the Government in respect of little or no notification of the changes to the SPA in 1995 and 2011. https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/women-seeking-pension-justice/

  • Your Pension Minister Ros Altmann – Westminster Job Centre

    On a rainy Tuesday, we wiggled our way round the back of Westminster Cathedral to the DWP which houses Pensions Minister Ros Altmann and also Work and Pensions minister Iain Duncan-Smith.  As it turned out, it also housed a security guard called “Babs”. 

    We were a trio from Ark Class Action which represents victims of pension scams such as Ark, Capita Oak and Evergreen.  With me were the vice chair (an Ark victim who lost her final salary pension along with her partner); and secretary (also an Ark victim who lost her final salary pension along with her husband).  The previous evening, they had spent several hours comforting a very distressed Capita Oak victim who was worried sick that the assets of his pension – Store First store pods – were now worthless.

    We had gone to meet recently appointed Altmann to urge her to ensure the government takes the action which is so desperately needed to tackle pension scams.  Altmann, former adviser on pensions to the Labour government, had severely criticized George Osborne for his “cavalier” attitude to Britain’s 12 million pensioners – one of the most powerful voting blocks in the country.  http://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/mar/27/george-osborne-ignore-pensioners-peril#comments

     We had decided not to waste our time seeing Iain Duncan-Smith since a year previously he had promised support, action and meetings, but had turned out to be as dishonest as the scammers themselves.  After his false promises, he had then gone on to “lose” one member’s entire file, including copies of bank statements and then lied about having returned it by recorded delivery.

    Altmann had always come across to me as an honourable person and we had high hopes that she would take the time and trouble to understand the seriousness of the pension scam industry – which continues to flourish and ruin thousands of victims – costing billions of pounds’ worth of pensions every year.  Having already met shadow Pensions Minister Nick Thomas Symonds, Mayor of London Boris Johnson and MP Wes Streeting, we felt sure Altmann would want to engage with the Class Action and spearhead an anti pension scam campaign without hesitation.

     Having spent weeks trying to set up the meeting with Altmann, our mission was to ensure she understood that the system of policing and preventing pension scams was quite simply broken.  We wanted her to become the champion who would take the credit for putting this disgraceful situation right while regulators, police authorities, HMRC and the government continue to fail to address the problem.  With the Pensions Select committee aiming to treat pension scams as a spectator sport, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmworpen/371/37106.html we thought Altmann might step up to the plate and launch a military-style, zero-tolerance initiative against pension scams and scammers.

    We thought wrong.  Babs the security guard informed us:

    “You are not going to be seen and you need to leave the premises.  This is not a Job Centre”.

    Altmann has brought both the Cabinet and the House of Lords into disrepute by publicly turning her back on thousands of victims of pension scams.  She would do well to remember that along with many frontline workers, there are Police officers and Armed Forces personnel losing their pensions every day. 

    MPs have already urged the government to take action against the embarrassing and disgraceful scandal of unchallenged pension fraud. 

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/13893452.MPs_urge_government_to_act_on_embarrassing_rise_in_pension_frauds/?ref=twtrec

    I suggest she puts rather more effort into doing her job properly and less effort into comparing the DWP with a Job Centre.  Her responsibility is to champion the cause of thousands of victims of pension fraud – both helping existing victims and preventing future ones.  Altmann should hark back to the warnings she herself made about George Osborne’s “cavalier attitude” to pensioners before she was appointed pensions minister.  And also remember the criticisms she was making about the government four years ago.  http://www.theguardian.com/money/2011/mar/27/george-osborne-ignore-pensioners-peril#comments  And then search her conscience honestly.