Memorandum submitted by Age Concern (PC
07)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Age Concern England (the National Council
on Ageing) brings together Age Concern organisations working at
a local level and 100 national bodies, including charities, professional
bodies and representational groups with an interest in older people
and ageing issues. Through our national information line, which
receives 225,000 telephone and postal enquiries a year, and the
information services offered by local Age Concern organisations,
we are in day to day contact with older people and their concerns.
1.2 Around the time of the first anniversary
of the introduction of Pension Credit it is timely to look at
what has been achieved so far and to consider its future. Age
Concern gave written and oral evidence to the Committee's 2002
inquiry into Pension Credit and in preparing this response we
have looked back at our views at that time. We have also drawn
on: the day to day contact Age Concern locally and nationally
has with older people; Age Concern research in April-May 2004
with over 2,600 older people of whom nearly 500 reported receiving
Pension Credit;[26]
other research and statistical information; and the regular contacts
we have with the DWP and other organisations at a local and national
level.
2. SUMMARY
Overview of pension credit
2.1 Age Concern supports the Government's
aims of tackling poverty and rewarding and encouraging saving.
While Pension Credit has brought welcome additional income it
is not a long term solution. We need an increased basic state
pension and better opportunities for saving in order to reduce
the need for reliance on means-testing in retirement.
Impact for current and future pensioners
2.2 Our research and the feedback from the
older people we are in contact with shows that extra amounts have
made a difference to the lives of many but others are disappointed.
There remains strong support for a higher state pension.
2.3 We believe that the increasing emphasis
on means-testing in retirement is likely to have a disincentive
effect on saving for retirement among those with modest life time
earnings.
2.4 There are problems due to the ways that
Pension Credit interacts with other benefits and charging regimes
for older people. There needs to be integrated administrative
procedures and closer alignment of rules. People also need good
information about the impact of Pension Credit on state and non-state
support.
Recommendations for policy changes
2.5 Age Concern welcomes the policy changes
that have improved income-related benefits for older people. There
are further changes we wish to see, in particular:
— an extension of the period of time
that Pension Credit can be paid during a temporary stay abroad;
— an increase in the earnings disregard;
and
— the abolition of the £16,000
capital limit for Housing and Council Tax Benefit for all claimants.
Take-up and service delivery
2.6 If Government targets for 2006 are met
then take-up will still only be around three-quarters despite
proactive efforts made by the Pension Service and others.
2.7 The telephone service is providing an
effective and efficient service for many people but is not suitable
for everyone. We have some concerns that inaccurate or incomplete
information is sometimes given especially in non-standard or more
complicated cases. Feedback on the role of the local Pension Service
has generally been positive.
2.8 It is vital that the progress made by
the Pension Service is not lost due to job cuts and further reorganisation
and we are monitoring the impact of changes on the service received
by older people
Direct Payments
2.9 The change to Direct Payments is causing
concern and distress for many older people. We are worried that
the cheque payment service, aimed at some of the most vulnerable
older people, relies on a weekly cheque arriving safely and on
time.
3. OVERVIEW OF
THE ROLE
OF PENSION
CREDIT IN
RETIREMENT INCOME
3.1 Age Concern strongly supports the Government's
aims: of tackling pensioner poverty; ensuring people are rewarded
from having saved; and encouraging saving for retirement. We welcome
the increases in income that Pension Credit has brought to many
older people. However, while in many ways it is a better and more
generous system than Minimum Income Guarantee (MIG) we are concerned
at the extension of means-testing which has inherent problems
such as incomplete take-up, complicated administration and potential
savings disincentives. Age Concern believes that everyone should
be able to achieve an adequate income in retirement through a
combination of a basic state pension paid at a level to cover
basic costs and second pensions and other private provision. We
are not arguing for current benefits to be reduced but for an
increased state pension and better opportunities for saving so
that far fewer people need to rely on means-tested top-ups.
Age Concern supports the Government's aims of
tackling poverty and rewarding and encouraging saving. While Pension
Credit has brought welcome additional income it is not a long
term solution. We need an increased basic state pension and better
opportunities for saving in order to reduce the need for reliance
on means-testing in retirement.
4. PENSION CREDIT
AND THE
INCOMES OF
CURRENT PENSIONERS
4.1 For current pensioners Pension Credit
was introduced to continue the role of the Minimum Income Guarantee
in tackling poverty, and to introduce a new element which would
reward people for having saved. At the end of August 2004, 2.61
million pensioner households (3.17 million individuals) were receiving
Pension Credit[27]—of
these 1.94 million households (2.36 million individuals) were
receiving extra as a result of its introduction. At the end of
May 2004 the average gain of those whose money had increased was
£15.14 per household.
4.2 One of the aims of the Age Concern Pension
Credit research referred to above was to find out from older people
what impact this had made on their lives. In monetary terms just
over a quarter (26%) said they have gained up to £5, a similar
proportion said £5-10 a week (27%) or £10-£20 (27%),
while just under one in 10 (9%) reported it had increased their
income by more than £20 a week. Another tenth (11%) did not
know. Although most reported receiving modest additional amounts
just over a half (53%) agreed or tended to agree that it had made
"a noticeable difference to my quality of life". When
asked in what way, the most common response was that people worried
less about paying for essential items such as food and bills.
However, not everyone reported any positive impact with around
a third saying Pension Credit had made no noticeable difference.
Despite this the vast majority (85%) of Pension Credit recipients
said they would definitely recommend that others should apply
and a further 11% said that they would possibly recommend it.
4.3 While the research shows many are pleased
with the benefit they receive, Age Concern has also been contacted
by older people who are unhappy with the system or the amount
they have been awarded and complain that it was hardly worth the
process of applying. And while the system is more generous than
MIG, as with any kind of means-test there will always be those
who miss out.
"Many like my parents have
worked all their lives, never claiming any benefit whatsoever,
and managing to save a little money for their old age are now
being penalised in this way".
Daughter of a pensioner couple whose income
is around £5 over the level for receiving savings credit.
A local Age Concern said that
many older people they had dealt with felt savings credit in particular
was "Much ado about Nothing"—a lot of form filling
in for little return.
4.4 Despite the positive feedback from many
older people in our study there was strong support for a better
state pension with 90% agreeing that people should have an adequate
pension and not need to apply for additional income support from
income-related benefits. Although just over half (54%) felt that
means-testing was a fair way to deliver benefits a higher proportion
(57%) said Pension Credit should not be means-tested and nearly
three-quarters (73%) said means-testing put people off. At first
sight these findings appear somewhat contradictory but it suggests
that while people can rationalise that means-testing seems a fair
approach in principle, they do not want to go through the process
themselves and believe it to be a deterrent to others.
Our research and the feedback from the older
people we are in contact with shows that extra amounts have made
a difference to the lives of many but others are disappointed.
There remains strong support for a higher state pension.
The impact for disadvantaged groups
4.5 As would be expected the majority of
Pension Credit claimants are women as they tend to have lower
incomes than men. Age Concern has been working to highlight the
difficulties that many older women face in trying to build up
an adequate retirement income and campaigning for changes to bring
about better pension coverage.[28]
We welcome the increases in income that older women have received
but for the reasons explained above we do not believe means-tested
benefits are a long-term solution to poverty in retirement.
4.6 Older people from black and minority
ethnic (BME) groups are more likely to be in poverty than pensioners
in general (nearly a third as opposed to just over a fifth) so
it would therefore be expected that percentages claiming Pension
Credit are higher. We have not yet seen any national breakdown
by ethnicity but our research found a higher percentage of older
people from BME groups were in receipt of or had applied for Pension
Credit than among the sample as a whole —this is despite
the fact that more people from BME groups were unaware of Pension
Credit (see more section 6 for more on awareness).
A simpler system?
4.7 One criticism of income-related benefits
has always been their complexity and Pension Credit was intended
to address some aspects of this. On the other hand any moves to
make a means-tested system fairer and more generous can often
introduce new layers of complexity. In our view although Pension
Credit has in some respects made the system simpler, in other
ways it has had the opposite affect. These areas are summarised
below and covered in more detail later on.
Claiming: the emphasis on telephone claims
has, for those who wish to claim in this way, made the system
easier however, this is not suitable for everyone.
Calculation: the calculation of savings
credit, while ingenious, is extremely hard to explain or understand.
Income assessment rules: in contrast
to Income Support, income to be taken into account is specified
in legislation. Although most forms of income that were previously
included are specified there are some differences which has made
the position simpler—notably voluntary and charitable payments
do not affect Pension Credit.
Assessed income periods: While increases
in some forms of income and capital do not needed to be reported
straightaway making the system less onerous, it may not always
be clear to people what must be reported to which Government department.
More people included: Making the system
more generous brings many more people into entitlement. This then
increases the numbers who need to consider the interaction between
means-tested benefits and other financial support when making
decisions for example about future saving or releasing equity.
Links with other forms of financial support:
the more generous Pension Credit rules have not necessarily
been reflected in other forms of support for older people leading
to some confusing discrepancies.
Understanding the system
4.8 Particularly in the early stages of
Pension Credit Age Concern received many enquiries from older
people wanting more information or to know if they were likely
to qualify. People are still often confused and some assume because
it is called a "pension" it is part of the state pension
and therefore not means-tested. Some older people with partners
have been disappointed to learn they cannot qualify based on their
individual circumstances.
4.9 The Government has argued that it does
not matter that the savings credit calculation is complicated
because people do not need to be able to work it out. However,
we know that for some people this is precisely want they do want
to do. People contact us with their own calculations for checking
or to get a second opinion on an award notice received. For these
people it is important to know that they are not being under or
overpaid benefit.
4.10 Due to the complexity it is difficult
for people to know if they will qualify and if so for how much.
Knowing the likely outcome of a claim is important for encouraging
take-up. DWP research[29]
found that 70% of people in the study who were entitled to Minimum
Income Guarantee but not claiming said they would only claim if
they knew they were entitled. In promoting Pension Credit the
DWP and others have to consider whether to provide some headline
figures to show levels of entitlement. While figures can give
people a useful indication of whether to claim, they can be also
be misleading as, for example, people who have higher incomes
may still be entitled due to extra additions due to caring or
disability. There has also been debate about which figures to
use—the guarantee levels might put off people who qualify
for the savings credit alone, while the upper income figure for
savings credit can raise unrealistic expectations as some people
assume their income will be topped up to this higher amount.
4.11 Aside from the savings credit calculation
there are complex interactions with other parts of the benefit
system. Some examples of the kinds of issues which Age Concern
and other advisers have to try to explain include:
— An older carer receiving a state
pension is refused Pension Credit because her income is a little
too high. An adviser may need to explain that she should claim
a different benefit—Carer's Allowance. This will not be
paid because of her pension but if she reapplies for Pension Credit
she may now qualify because of the carer addition.
— A disabled person can get an extra
amount with their Pension Credit if they are severely disabled
but this depends on who they live with and this amount could stop
if their carer claims Carer's Allowance (although not if the Carer's
Allowance cannot be paid because of overlapping benefits rules).
— A man contacting Age Concern wanted
an explanation as to why, when he applied for Housing Benefit/Council
Tax Benefit he and his wife were considered to need around £181
to live on (the level at which he could get full help with housing
costs) whereas when he applied for help with dental treatment
the system expected him to be able to live on around £160
a week.
5. PENSION CREDIT
AND FUTURE
PENSIONERS
5.1 In addition to improving the income
of current older people the Government stated that Pension Credit
would "boost the incentive for future pensioners to save
for their retirement".[30]
In our 2002 response to the Committee we stated that we were not
convinced by the argument that Pension Credit would encourage
people to save more for retirement. While Pension Credit means
that most (but not all) people will be better off from having
saved, the amounts gained may not be worth forgoing current income.
People are unlikely to know the details of Pension Credit but
many will have picked up the message that more people are becoming
entitled to top-up retirement benefits and this may have a disincentive
rather than incentive affect. There continues to be major concern
about the adequacy of saving for retirement and possible future
entitlement to benefits will be only one of many factors that
will influence people's decisions. However, we would like to see
the DWP carrying out research to explore this matter further.
Ideally this would have started before the introduction of Pension
Credit to monitor any changes over time.
5.2 The current system makes it difficult
for individuals on low and modest incomes and their advisers to
decide whether they should save for retirement. This will apply
particular to many women and other groups who may have long periods
out of the labour market or in low paid part-time work so will
have more limited opportunities to save on a regular basis.
A man contacted Age Concern to ask whether
someone on a low income should be contributing to a stakeholder
pension. He had been told by one IFA that it was a waste of time
while another said he was not sure if a stakeholder pension would
be paid on top of Pension Credit. We were able to explain the
current rules but of course could not advise whether or not he
should be contributing to a stakeholder pension.
5.3 In the absence of further evidence we
do not believe that Pension Credit is providing an incentive to
save—if anything it is likely to deter saving. We continue
to believe that a basic state pension paid at an adequate level
to cover basic costs would provide a firm foundation on which
to build up private income and offer the best incentive for saving.
We note that many organisations and commentators share the view
that there should be a higher state pension and less means-testing.
We believe that the increasing emphasis on means-testing
in retirement is likely to have a disincentive effect on saving
for retirement among those with low and modest life time earnings.
6. PENSION CREDIT
AND OTHER
BENEFITS, CHARGING
PROCEDURES, AND
SOURCES OF
FINANCIAL SUPPORT
6.1 Pension Credit is one way of a range
of sources of financial support for older people. This section
looks first at specific issues in relation to the links with Housing
Benefit (HB) and Council Tax Benefit (CTB) and then considers
how Pension Credit links with other financial sources more generally.
Pension credit, housing benefit and council tax
benefit
6.2 We have had complaints from older people
who have been awarded savings credit only to find that most of
this is lost through increased rent and council tax. In October
2003 increases to HB and CTB applicable amounts were made to ensure
that everyone who claimed Pension Credit before October 2003 received
all of any Pension Credit awarded and did not lose any HB/CTB.
However, those who claim now and who are already receiving the
higher levels of HB/CTB find that if they are awarded savings
credit alone each £1 awarded results in a 65 pence reduction
in HB paid and a 20 pence reduction in CTB.
A woman wrote to Age Concern on behalf of
her 79 year old mother who had been "delighted" to receive
an extra £10.15 a week. She had been reluctant to claim but
was persuaded to do so by her family having been reassured that
other benefits would not be affected because her letter from the
Pension Service dated August 2003 stated "Pension Credit
will not affect any benefits you are already receiving, for example
Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit". However, when she
was awarded savings credit in early 2004 most of this was eaten
up by increases in HB and CTB leaving her very disappointed.
6.3 This loss of benefit would not occur
if savings credit was disregarded for the purposes of HB/CTB.
However, had the Government decided to do this then it presumably
would not have increased the HB/CTB applicable amounts—a
move that has benefited many older people including those not
receiving Pension Credit. In the context of the current system
the most important thing that can be done for new claimants is
to ensure that Pension Credit, HB and CTB are all assessed at
the same time as discussed below. However, we anticipate that
we will continue to hear from people already claiming HB/CTB who
understandably question why one part of Government awards a benefit
and another takes most of it away.
6.4 Some older people have reported that
they are worse off than before and one lady contacting Age Concern
said she had written to the Pension Service asking to cancel her
Pension Credit. In fact no-one should be worse off by claiming
Pension Credit. In some cases the older person has misunderstood
the position however, in other situations administration has been
poor. For example we have heard of local authorities wrongly asking
people for backdated payments (although Pension Credit can be
backdated to 6 October 2003 HB/CTB should only be adjusted from
the date the local authority receives notification from the Pension
Service).
6.5 We have also heard of other examples
of poor administration including people who have been told incorrectly
by local authority staff that no-one can receive HB/CTB if they
have more than £16,000 savings (there is no capital limit
if someone is in receipt of the guarantee credit). A local Age
Concern reports that their authority has still been asking for
verification even though they should not be doing this because
information has already been verified by the Pension Service.
These problems emphasise the need to align capital rules and administration
as discussed below.
Joining up systems—administration and take-up
6.6 As we discuss below much has been done
by the Pension Service to encourage take-up and we welcome the
approach that has been taken. While there is an aim of providing
a more holistic service covering all benefits and support—for
example through the proposed Link-Age Service (previously known
as the Third Age Service) and Joint Teams—there is a long
way to go. Older people need information and support about the
whole range of available services from one source but the administrative
systems also need to be much more closely linked.
6.7 Although local authorities must now
use data on income and capital verified by the Pension Service
we still have a system that is not joined up. For example an older
person who has already given a large amount of data about income,
savings and other personal details to the local authority for
claiming CTB and separately to the Health Benefits Division to
get help with health costs such as dental treatment may still
need to give virtually the same detailed information to the Pension
Service in order to claim Pension Credit. People may not know,
or be prepared to give the same information yet again.
A man contacted Age Concern to express his
concern that, since he had started to draw his pension he and
his wife's income had gone up by only a modest amount but this
had taken them above the (then) MIG level so he was having to
pay towards rent and council tax and was expected to pay the first
£60 of dental treatment. From his details the adviser explained
he was likely to qualify for around £10 savings credit although
this would reduce housing costs benefits. Because of this, his
worry that this would increase further the amount he had to pay
for dental treatment, and the reluctance to make another claim,
he does not want to apply for the Pension Credit he is entitled
to.
A disabled pensioner who is very reluctant
to have any form of outside help was finally persuaded to ring
the Pension Credit claim line by her daughter who is her carer.
She found the process easy and the member of staff helpful but
decided making one claim was enough and said she did not want
to claim CTB. Although she was awarded guarantee credit, so would
be likely to receive full CTB, she has yet to be convinced to
ask for help again.
6.8 Another area where the systems need
to be joined up is where people move from one benefit to another.
So while when Pension Credit was introduced people were automatically
transferred from Income Support to Pension Credit this no longer
happens. Once people reach the age of 60 they need to reapply
even though Jobcentre Plus may hold all the information required
(see also the section on delays later).
6.9 We know that the intention is make the
systems more integrated but it is frustrating that little progress
seems to have been made towards that goal. It is essential that
we move as quickly as possible towards a system where all information
provided by an individual for the purpose of claiming benefits
or financial support is (with the individual's permission) automatically
used to assess other entitlements with the person contacted for
further information if needed. This would cut down administration
needed, reduce hassle for individuals, and improve take-up among
those already in the system. The Pension Service and other organisations
could then concentrate their take-up work on those who may so
far have limited contact with Government services.
Joining up systems—the rules
6.10 Major changes have been made to the
systems of financial support. While these may have been done for
very good reasons it does mean that we now have very different
systems of assessment and support—the most striking being
differences between social security benefits and tax credits leading
to complications for those entitled to both (which includes some
older people). We also have differences in the income-related
benefits for people of different ages so for example the rules
for Housing Benefit depend on whether someone is aged under 60,
60 to 64, or 65 and over.
6.11 Many, but not all, of the new features
of Pension Credit have been reflected in HB and CTB for people
aged 60 over. However, other systems of financial support do not
necessarily follow the same rules. A further seemingly unnecessary
complication is that different terms can be used—why for
example are there "applicable amounts" and "premiums"
for severe disability and carers in HB/CTB but "appropriate
amounts" and "additional amounts" in Pension Credit?
6.12 It is little wonder that older people,
and their helpers and advisers, find the systems difficult. As
an example some of the differences in just one aspect of assessment—the
capital rules—are given below. To avoid even greater complexity
we have only included health related limits for England (limits
in Scotland and Wales differ).
CAPITAL RULES IN BENEFITS AND CHARGES FOR
PEOPLE AGED 60 AND OVER
| Upper limit* |
Lower limit* |
| Pension Credit | None | £6,000
|
| Pension Credit (care home) | None
| £10,000 |
| Local authority (LA) financial assessment—care homes (England)
| £20,000 | £12,250
|
| Local authority financial assessment—home care (England)
| £20,000 but can be higher at LAs discretion
| £12,250 but can be higher LAs at discretion
|
| HB/CTB if receiving guarantee credit | None
| Passported from PC |
| HB/CTB if not receiving guarantee credit |
£16,000 | £6,000 |
| Income Support, Jobseekers Allowance** |
£12,000 | £6,000 |
| Health benefits if receiving PC guarantee |
None | Passported from PC |
| Health benefits (if not getting PC guarantee)
| £12,000 | £6,000
|
| Health benefits (care home) England if not receiving PC guarantee
| £20,000 | £12,250
|
| Independent Living Fund | £18,500
| £11,500 |
| Tax credits | None—income only assessed
| |
* Capital between the upper and lower limit is assumed to produce an income of £1 for every 250 or £1 for every 500 (depending on the type of benefit/assessment) although LAs have the discretion for a more generous system with home charges.
** People aged 60 and over can receive IS/JSA in some circumstances but would normally claim Pension Credit instead.
| | |
6.13 We acknowledge that the Government has chosen to
take a different approach to in work and out of work financial
support and this will inevitably lead to differences. However,
in terms of benefits for older people we believe that there is
much that should be done to try to align systems. A first step
would be to remove the HB/CTB capital limit for people not receiving
guarantee credit.
Equity release
6.14 In general once people retire from employment, there
is little they can do to increase their income or savings so they
do not need to consider whether their behaviour will affect their
Pension Credit entitlement. An exception for home owners is the
possibility of taking out an equity release plan. Under the previous
MIG/CTB rules the system was relatively straightforward—any
increase in income or capital had to be reported and was likely
to affect benefit payable. However, the situation is different
with the October 2003 rules. Not only have more people been brought
into the scope of income-related benefits but the position is
more complicated. For example due to the assessed income period
(AIP) an increase in income or capital may not affect Pension
Credit straightway although if something happened to end the AIP
it would be taken into account.
6.15 From October 2004 the sale of one type of equity
release product, lifetime mortgages, will be regulated, but the
other type of scheme, home reversions, will not be regulated until
a later date. Under the regulated scheme those selling, or advising
about schemes, will be required to consider whether taking out
a product is the right option for the individual and this will
include considering the potential impact on benefits. However,
it is a complicated area and financial advisers cannot be expected
to be experts in all the details of welfare benefits. There is
a danger that people may take out a scheme without being fully
aware of the implications for their current or future benefit
position or that advisers, concerned at potential mis-selling,
may not wish to sell products to those with modest resources as
they would not feel confident enough about the benefit position.
6.16 It is essential that older people, and their formal
and informal advisers, are very clear about the impact of equity
release on current and possible future entitlements. Age Concern
has been in discussion with the Council of Mortgage Lenders who
are considering how best to that ensure advisers and lenders have
appropriate guidance. There is also a need for the DWP to work
with the regulator, providers and interested organisations on
this issue.
Passporting
6.17 An important reason for receiving, even a small
amount of Pension Credit, is that it passports someone to other
benefits such as the ability to claim social fund payments. With
two elements of Pension Credit it can be either the guarantee
credit, or both savings and guarantee credit which can passport
people to other sources of help. This can complicate the system
especially as our research found nearly three in 10 (29%) did
not know which element(s) they were receiving. We welcome the
fact that those with slightly higher incomes receiving savings
credit only can now apply for help such discretionary social fund
payments and Warm Front Plus however, we believe it would be fairer
and simpler if the systems were consistent so either element passported
people to other sources of support including the maximum help
with health costs such as dental treatment.
Pension credit and charging policies
6.18 Age Concern was very disappointed in the way the
Department of Health responded to the implementation of Pension
Credit. It has created a number of anomalies and, has meant that
those getting the savings credit do not always see the full value
of it. In our view the changes the Department of Health made in
relation to Pension Credit do not reflect the Government's policy
of rewarding those who have saved.
6.19 Our main concern is that for residential care, the
amount that residents can keep extra if they have put money into
savings is a mere £4.65, a long way short of the maximum
amount allowed in the savings credit (of £15.51). In contrast
the applicable amounts were altered in Housing Benefit and Council
Tax Benefit to make sure that people saw the full value of having
saved. People in care homes have thus been disadvantaged.
6.20 For those at home there is a straightforward disregard
of whatever the person happens to receive via the savings credit,
but this in itself can lead to an anomaly in that a person who
may have saved too much to get the full savings credit (or even
to get any at all), could by the charging system be left with
less money than someone who has saved less.
6.21 Although Pension Credit is not supposed to make
anyone worse off, there has been a group that has been adversely
affected—those people where one of a couple goes into a
care home for a temporary period. Income Support rules allow the
DWP to base assessment on joint income and capital, but allow
each member of the couple a single person's applicable amount.
Pension Credit however, only allows them their usual rate at home
as a couple. Therefore unless the local authority applies more
generous charging rules older people who are having respite care
could be worse off than they would have been under Income Support.
It has been left to local authority discretion how much they leave
the partner at home. This does not appear to be advancing the
Government policy of giving carers breaks from caring.
6.22 The Department of Health has kept its upper and
lower capital limits. It has also kept tariff income at the rate
of £1 for every £250. For domiciliary care local authorities
have discretion whether to follow the capital limits and tariff
income as set for residential care, they can be more generous.
From research undertaken for Age Concern the majority of local
authorities responding followed the capital limits for residential
care and only a very few followed the more generous assumed income
for Pension Credit. Thus, because of not changing the tariff income
rules to be in line with Pension Credit, some people found that
their extra guarantee credit was wiped out by increases in charges.
It adds to the administrative complexity.
6.23 In general the Department of Health has decided
to continue to follow rules for Income Support where they differ
from those of Pension Credit. This is surprising considering that
approximately 80% of people in care homes are older people and
so in receipt of Pension Credit rather than Income Support. Reviews
of charges are held each year whereas a person may well be in
an assessed income period for Pension Credit. This combined with
the different levels of tariff income means that it becomes increasingly
difficult for staff to administer and for residents to understand
their charging calculations as each year passes.
There are problems due to the ways that Pension Credit interacts
with other benefits and charging regimes for older people. There
needs to be integrated administrative procedures and closer alignment
of rules. People also need good information about the impact of
Pension Credit on state and non-state support.
7. PENSION CREDIT
POLICY ISSUES
7.1 Pension Credit introduced a number of favourable
changes and since the original Pension Credit proposals there
have been some further policy changes that Age Concern has strongly
supported—in particular the rules announced in the March
2003 Budget that people can continue to receive Pension Credit
(and state pensions and some other state benefits) for up to one
year after admission to hospital and more recently the announcement
that Pension Credit will continue to be backdated for up to a
year after October 2004. We also welcome the fact that the lump
sum that people will be able to receive if they choose to defer
their state pension will be disregarded for the purposes of Pension
Credit (although the impact on benefits will be only one factor
that people need to consider when making a choice so it is important
that people have access to good information). However, there are
other policy changes that would make the system fairer and more
acceptable.
Pension credit during a temporary stay abroad
7.2 Under the current position, Pension Credit normally
stops after four weeks abroad. This particularly affects older
people from black and minority ethnic groups with friends and
relatives living some distance away who may be able to visit infrequently
but when they do will often wish to stay abroad for longer than
four weeks. Not only do people face a loss of income for that
period, but will need to reapply again on return (even if they
had originally been given an assessed income period of five years).
Age Concern launched a campaign on this issue and the Government
has announced a review of the rules saying "officials are
currently researching a range of options for potentially extending
the period for which Pension Credit can continue to be paid for
customers who go abroad for less than 52 weeks".[31]
We are very pleased at this and hope for an early announcement
that the period of time before Pension Credit is stopped during
a temporary stay abroad is increased to at least 13 weeks.
Assessment of capital
7.3 Age Concern welcomed the abolition of the capital
limit for Pension Credit which has helped those with low incomes
but modest levels of capital. We were also pleased that the previous
tariff income of £1 for every £250 over £6,000
was modified. There are arguments for and against a system of
assumed income as opposed to assessing actual income but on balance
we decided that an assumed income system was probably fairer and
easier. However, we argued that: the assumed income should be
£1 for every £1,000 over the lower limit; the lower
limit should be regularly reviewed and increased; and consideration
should be given to a higher limit of £10,000 in line with
the limit in care homes. These views still stand as we continue
to hear from people who feel the current assessment and assumed
rate is unfair.
7.4 The complexities of different capital rules for different
benefit/charging regimes were considered above. Retaining a £16,000
HB/CTB capital limit for people not receiving the guarantee credit
can also produce unfair outcomes in policy terms. For example
a single person with a basic state pension and £18,000 savings
would be entitled to a small amount of guarantee credit, savings
credit, and get benefit to cover all their rent and council tax.
However, if they also had a couple of pounds of state additional
pension or occupational pension they would no longer get guarantee
credit and would not be entitled to any help with rent and council
tax making them considerable worse off.
Earnings disregard
7.5 Under Pension Credit in most cases earnings of up
to £5 a week for a single person and £10 for a couple
are disregarded. In its 2002 report the Committee agreed with
evidence presented by Age Concern and others that this disregard
was too low and "strongly recommended" that the first
£40 of earnings was ignored. We believe that the case for
increasing the disregard remains just as strong—if not stronger
given the Government's emphasis on encouraging older people to
continue to work if they wish to, and the that fact that the level
of disregards has not changed since 1988.
Assessed income period
7.6 Age Concern welcomed the introduction of longer awards
and the provisions which mean that people do not need to report
increases in savings and certain types of savings. However, we
noted that as savings are more likely to go down rather than up
in retirement it was important that people were aware that they
should report changes that might increase their income.
7.7 We also have some concerns that if someone mistakenly
does not report a relevant change this may not be picked up for
several years potentially leading to a large overpayment. For
example a person receiving Pension Credit savings credit only
who inherits money that takes their savings to over £16,000
may be aware that they do not need to tell the Pension Service
but not realise that they do still need to tell the local authority
who will stop payment of HB/CTB. There can also be uncertainty
if someone spends their capital and is not sure whether at a later
date they will be assessed as having notional capital because
they are judged to have deprived themselves of capital in order
to increase benefit.
An older couple receiving Pension Credit guarantee with
a five year assessed income period won £125,000 on the lottery
which they wished to give to their grandchildren. They asked Age
Concern if the win needed to be reported to the Pension Service
and, if not, in five years time when their benefit was reassessed
would their benefit be affected because they had wanted to help
their grandchildren. We could answer the first question but not
the second as issues of notional capital are considered in an
individual basis.
7.8 It is too early to see if the introduction of AIPs
will cause difficulties although we hope that the Pension Service
will deal sensitively with cases where people have spent savings
and with overpayments that arise when it is clear there was no
intention to mislead. We would also like to see evaluation of
the impact of AIPs to assess the positive advantages these have
brought for individuals and whether there are any disadvantages,
such as confusion because the rules can be different for other
benefits.
Age Concern welcomes the policy changes that have improved
income-related benefits for older people. There are further changes
we wish to see, in particular:
— an extension of the period of time that Pension
Credit can be paid during a temporary stay abroad;
— an increase in the earnings disregard; and
— the abolition of the £16,000 capital limit
for Housing and Council Tax Benefit for all claimants.
8. PENSION CREDIT
TAKE-UP
8.1 Of the estimated 3.75 million pensioner households
currently entitled to Pension Credit, by the end of August 2004,
2.61 million were in receipt of the benefit. Although there have
been a large number of claims since its introduction, this means
that 30% are still missing out. And even if the DWP meets the
Spending Review targets of 3 million households in receipt of
Pension Credit by 2006 and 3.2 million by 2008 there will still
be around a quarter who will not be receiving the Pension Credit
they are entitled to.[32]
8.2 There is a considerable amount of research and anecdotal
evidence around why older people do not claim their full entitlements
which point to a number of inter-related factors including: lack
of awareness and basic understanding of benefits; people being
unclear about their own individual entitlement; difficulties with
the process of claiming; and negative attitudes surrounding claiming
benefits.
8.3 The Pension Service (and other organisations including
Age Concern) has done much to publicise and inform people, and
to work proactively to encourage claiming. We note that in designing
the benefit and its administration, attempts were made to address
some of the barriers. Despite this our research earlier this year
found that over one in 10 (11%) pensioners were not aware that
Pension Credit existed. The issues of understanding and complexity
have already been considered. In addition Pension Credit remains
a benefit that depends on an assessment of someone's income, savings
and other circumstances, and as such can never avoid completely
the negative factors associated with means-testing (regardless
of how it is described or presented).
"I am very disappointed with the tone of your letter
and the further information you are requesting as I find it overly
intrusive and it makes me out to be some sort of benefits/claims
cheat . . . My building society statements showing account name
and numbers are confidential information between myself and the
Building Society . . . It in fact would be easier to pick up that
25 tonne whale that went aground in Scotland than to pick up a
few extra pounds per week that I am supposedly entitled to. I
do not wish to pursue my claim for the elusive Pension Credit."
Letter sent to the Pension Service and copied to Age Concern
from an 84 year old woman who having applied over the phone decided
to withdraw her claim rather than supply documents.
8.4 So while we believe that more can be done to encourage
further take-up unfortunately we conclude it will never be possible
to achieve anything approaching full take-up. It is worth noting
that there is a near 100% take-up of the state pension even though
this is not paid automatically—it must also be claimed.
8.5 Although the Government focus has generally been
on Pension Credit we welcomed the Government's Council Tax Benefit
take-up campaign earlier this year and look forward to an evaluation
of this. It is important that take-up initiatives should have
an ongoing and holistic approach covering all benefits and services
and not be dictated by political factors. The links with other
benefits was considered earlier.
If Government targets for 2006 are met then take-up will
still only be around three-quarters despite proactive efforts
made by the Pension Service and others.
9. IMPLEMENTATION AND
SERVICE DELIVERY
9.1 Given the major reorganisation brought about by the
introduction of the Pension Service at the time that Pension Credit
was being planned and implemented, the Pension Service has overall
performed well. While there have inevitably been some problems,
those who had predicted major problems on the scale that was experienced
when new tax credits were introduced were proved wrong. The transfer
from MIG went smoothly and although some people were unsure about
what was happening, we did not have cases reported to Age Concern
where people were not automatically transferred.
Awareness of pension credit
9.2 The Pension Service has been carrying out a major
information and publicity campaign about Pension Credit. This
includes writing to all pensioner households, high profile national
media coverage, and follow up contact with those who appear entitled
but have not claimed. This appears to have been effective in terms
of increasing awareness as the Age Concern research found that
among 2,656 older people surveyed nearly nine out of 10 said they
had heard of it. However, this still meant just over one in 10
(11%) were not aware of Pension Credit.
9.3 The most commonly mentioned way of hearing about
Pension Credit was through media adverts and news items/articles
followed by information through the door. This contrasts with
an earlier National Audit Office survey (before Pension Credit)
which found that the most common way of finding out about benefits
was through friends and family.[33]
9.4 Our research found little difference in awareness
by gender, while breaking the findings down by age showed that
those aged 65-74 were a little more likely to have heard about
Pension Credit than those aged 60-64 or those aged 75 and over.
There was also a somewhat lower rate of awareness (17%) among
ethnic minority older people interviewed and this group was more
likely than the white population to say they had received their
information from family and friends showing the particular importance
of informal networks.
Working in partnership
9.5 There is now a much greater willingness for the DWP
to work in partnership with local authorities and voluntary organisations.
Nationally Age Concern is a member of Partnerships against Poverty
(PAP) and the PAP Pension Credit sub-group. The latter has met
regularly since mid-2002. It has been a very useful forum for
information exchange, to comment on campaign materials, and to
give an opportunity for partner organisations to feed in their
views and, in some cases, to influence the campaign. However,
there have been times when we would have like to have had opportunities
to influence at earlier stages. The group has also provided a
useful contact point for raising specific issues relating to policy,
administration or problems raised by individuals and local organisations.
Finally it has also given organisations a better understanding
of the task that the Pension Service faces in implementing Pension
Credit.
9.6 Locally many Age Concerns work closely with the Pension
Service and other organisations. Age Concern welcomes the partnership
approach—the challenge for us locally and nationally is
to ensure that partnership working improves the service for older
people without compromising our independence. It is important
for all partners to be clear about their different, but complimentary,
roles and responsibilities.
9.7 We also need to ensure that developments through
Link-Age and Joint Teams bring about positive benefits for all
older people. For example we would be concerned if close links
with the Fairer Charging sections of Local Authorities resulted
in the local Pension Service focussing on local authority clients
at the expense of those who need support but are not being assessed
for care charges.
Delays
9.8 In general the process appears to work smoothly and
efficiently although unsurprisingly, particularly around the introduction
of the Pension Credit, we heard from some people who have had
experienced delays and other problems for no apparent reason.
One area of ongoing concern is when people reach 60-65 and need
to move from Income Support/Jobseeker's Allowance to Pension Credit.
When someone claiming Income Support reaches 60 their benefit
will stop and they must claim Pension Credit. Jobseeker's Allowance
stops at pension age. Although people are meant to be contacted
and invited to claim this does not always happen and we have come
across cases where people are left without money. We understand
the DWP are looking at this issue but as stated earlier it is
an example of where systems need to be more integrated. Another
time of transition when delays can occur is after bereavement.
We have heard from widows waiting for the state pension to be
increased based on their late husband's record who are applying
for Pension Credit for the first time and are experiencing long
delays.
The telephone service
9.9 A major feature of the Pension Credit campaign has
been to encourage telephone claims and three-quarters of people
who have applied have used this method. This approach is also
central to the way that the Pension Service works more generally.
For many older people this has proved an effective and easy way
of claiming and contacting the Pension Service. Having said that
there are many older people who have difficulties dealing with
business on the phone, perhaps because they have hearing difficulties;
are a little confused; or because English is not the first language.
9.10 In terms of the service offered there have been
times when the lines have been under pressure and we have had
some complaints from people who have had difficulty getting through,
but our general impression is that most of the time people get
through quickly and staff are polite and try hard to help. Age
Concern England's national information line staff report cases
of Pension Credit Claim Line staff going out of their way to contact
them with concerns about older people not relating to Pension
Credit. We are therefore not surprised that the Pension Service's
research on the application process[34]
found high levels of satisfaction.
9.11 However, feedback from national and local Age Concern
Information and Advice staff suggests that staff on the Pension
Credit claim line and at Pension Service regional centres are
not always sufficiently well informed about more complicated issues
relating to Pension Credit or linked benefits or when they need
to go "off script". Our national information staff refer
to a "steady stream" of calls relating to lack of knowledge
or incorrect information about Pension Credit and related issues.
Some examples are:
— Particularly in the early days some older people
were referred to the national Age Concern Information Line for
basic information about Pension Credit.
— A local Age Concern worker reports that she has
had calls to the Pension Service lasting 45 minutes trying to
resolve queries that she would have expected to be dealt with
quickly by frontline staff.
— Incorrect information about issues relating to
claiming on behalf of someone who is mentally incapacitated.
— A client contacted Age Concern wanting to know
the position regarding payments for mortgage interest if she purchased
the other half of her property (currently belonging to a housing
association). She was told that the Pension Service could not
answer this but Age Concern or Citizens Advice would be able to.
— Some confusion around Assessed Income Periods
(AIPs)—for example someone being told that because they
had an (AIP) the capital from the sale of their home would not
be reassessed when they move to a care home.
Additions for caring and disability
9.12 It is important to ensure that people receive any
additions for severe disability or caring that they are entitled
to and we have heard of cases where these additions have been
omitted or people have received incorrect or incomplete information
from claim line staff.
9.13 Currently 22% of Pension Credit recipients receive
the severe disability additional amount and 4% receive the carer's
additional amount.[35]
Following discussions at the Partnership against Poverty group
the Pension Service has taken steps to improve the information
for staff around the carer's addition and Carer's Allowance and
we welcome this.
A local Age Concern reported two where Pension Credit had
been miscalculated due to premiums being missed. In one case this
had led to a short-fall of £24 and in the other nearly £80.
When the adviser contacted the Pension Centre the telephone staff
appeared not to understand about additional amounts. She had to
insist on speaking to a more senior member of staff but once she
got through the problem was sorted out very quickly. The errors
were only picked up because Age Concern had helped with the application
and were following up to make sure awards were correct. As the
adviser said "It leads me to wonder how many people who applied
over the telephone have been short-changed and don't realise it."
9.14 It is important that anyone giving information about,
or assisting with a claim for, Pension Credit not only ensures
that people receive appropriate additions if they are entitled
to Attendance Allowance/Disability Living Allowance or Carer's
Allowance, but also advises people to make a separate claim for
these benefits (or at least refers people to other sources of
support) where appropriate. The systems are complicated and most
older people cannot be expected to understand the interactions
between benefits, so staff need good training on this matter.
For example if one member of a couple receives Attendance Allowance
we would always expect someone taking a claim to explore whether
the other member could claim Carer's Allowance and increase their
income through the carer addition. If both partners are disabled
they may be eligible for two severe disability and two carer additions
and again we would expect Pension Service staff to pick this up.
9.15 It is difficult for us to judge how widespread problems
are in this area. We also note that even if there are problems
in only a minority of cases, this can still represent significant
numbers of older people given the large numbers entitled to Pension
Credit. We know that the Pension Service does monitor performance
and it is important that there is publicly available information
on this. We would also like to see mystery shopping exercises
to assess the ability of staff to deal with a range of cases and
enquiries.
Locally based services
9.16 Age Concern has been supportive of the development
of the local Pension Service and there are many good examples
of Age Concerns working in partnership. The feedback we have had
from our local organisations is generally very positive. Many
host Pension Service sessions and work on specific take-up campaigns
and in many areas there has been an increase in home visits. They
have also found staff helpful in resolving problems and sometimes
help in liaising with other parts of the Pension Service. There
is of course some variation in service—for example one county
Age Concern noted that in the north of their county the Pension
Service was having difficulty fulfilling home visits due to limited
numbers of staff and the rural nature of the area, whereas the
picture is different in the south of the county where the population
is denser and there are more local staff.
9.17 However, although we support the work that is being
done we have always maintained that there should be a permanent
Pension Service high street presence. Older people will not necessarily
know where the Pension Service will be based on a particular day
and may need urgent help. Some Jobcentre Plus staff are helpful
but others are reluctant to deal with older people.
9.18 In terms of Pension Credit take-up we are extremely
pleased that the local service is involved in initiatives to encourage
claims from disadvantaged groups and those who may have difficulties
in accessing the service—for example disabled older people,
those from BME groups and people living in isolated rural areas.
In some areas this involves proactively visiting older people.
It is important to accept that although such work is labour intensive
it is a vital way of helping excluded groups. It will be very
important to monitor the effectiveness of different initiatives
and to share good practice. We welcome the additional resources
for partnership working that have been made available through
the Partnership Fund.
The telephone service is providing an effective and efficient
service for many people but is not suitable for everyone. We have
some concerns that inaccurate or incomplete information is sometimes
given especially in non-standard or more complicated cases. Feedback
on the role of the local Pension Service had generally been positive.
Reduction in workforce
9.19 As the introduction of the Pension Service is starting
to bring about real improvements for older people, particularly
through the local service, we are very concerned about the potential
impact of the planned DWP job cuts and have written to the Secretary
of State. After a time of major change for the DWP we had hoped
that there would have been a period of stability and consolidation
as any change and threat of job security is likely to impact on
the service that staff provide.
9.20 We asked the Secretary of State for reassurance
that there would be no reduction in the local service and that
instead the aim should be to work towards increasing this. The
role of the local service is important if Pension Credit targets
are to be met and hopefully exceeded. The Government has stated
that fewer staff will be needed due to improvements in technology
and processes. However, there have been some major problems with
the introduction of new technology in the past and we have asked
for reassurance that jobs will not go until new procedures have
been tried and tested and it is clear that staff levels are higher
than needed.
9.21 In response to our letter we have been told that
although the local service is required to make some "efficiencies",
targeted take-up campaigns and the roll out of the Joint Service
will mean that levels of service will not be adversely affected.
We have also been told that transformation will be gradual and
this will allow new technology to be thoroughly tested.
9.22 Despite these assurances we continue to have concerns.
For example in terms of the local service one Age Concern noted
that while relationships with local managers are "excellent"
there is uncertainty about the future. Many of their local contacts
are having to decide whether to apply for their existing jobs
(with added responsibility but at the same wages) or take redundancy.
It is vital that the progress made by the Pension Service
is not lost due to job cuts and further reorganisation and we
are monitoring the impact of changes on the service received by
older people.
10. DIRECT PAYMENTS
10.1 The Work and Pensions Committee is also in interested
in the impact of Direct Payments. This is a major issue for many
older people who have been perfectly happy with collecting their
pension and benefits through an order book and see no reason why
they should change. The change, along with the loss of Post Offices,
is causing considerable confusion and distress and many people
are contacting Age Concern about this. The Government wants the
majority of people to receive their money paid directly into:
an ordinary bank or building society account; a basic bank account,
or the Post Office card account. It has always accepted that some
people will not be able to manage an account and they will be
paid through a weekly posted cheque payment.
10.2 Direct Payments is important in relation to the
Pension Credit for two reasons. Firstly there is a danger that
opposition to, and negative experiences surrounding, Direct Payment
will deter older people from further contact with the Pension
Service and may prevent people enquiring about or claiming Pension
Credit and other benefits. Having said that we welcome the fact
that the DWP has, from the start, accepted it is important to
separate mailings about Pension Credit from those on Direct Payment
and has not tried to link the two changes.
10.3 Secondly if the numbers opting for payment by account
are lower than the Government wishes more DWP staff and resources
may be directed towards this area of work. This could reduce the
numbers available to proactively encourage Pension Credit take-up
and provide other services particularly in the context of the
major job cuts planned.
10.4 In looking at the issues around Direct Payment it
is important to be clear that some problems are around the transition
process and we know that some people, once they are used to a
new way of receiving their pension, will adapt well to the new
system. However, for others the problems will be ongoing. We note
that recent DWP research found the majority of people in a sample
who had converted to Direct Payment were satisfied. However, among
pensioners a minority (15%) felt the system worse than the order
book; 8% were dissatisfied with the set up process and 4% were
not satisfied with the process of payment into account.[36]
While those unhappy with the system are a minority it is still
an sizeable number of individuals, and difficulties are likely
to be higher among those who have not yet been persuaded to covert.
Some of our main concerns are summarised below.
Information
10.5 Despite frequent requests from Age Concern and other
organisations, information directed at clients about Direct Payment
has generally not made it clear that there will be a service for
people who are not able to deal with an account. However, we welcome
the fact that it appears letters now going out informing people
that their next order book will be the last, do refer to cheque
payments.
10.6 Having said that, although cheque payments will
start in October full details of the service are not available.
For example a paper produced in May 2004 referred to possible
postal strikes saying that there is no question of people not
getting their payments and the DWP was "reviewing its continuity
arrangements" but at the end of September 2004 we have still
received no more information about this. It is difficult to see
how at this stage we can ensure that all our local staff and volunteers
can get full information by the time order books start to disappear,
let alone promote information to older people.
Pressure to convert
10.7 Some older people have been contacted a number of
times including by telephone and feel they have been put under
great pressure to change to Direct Payment. In some cases this
has resulted in people changing inappropriately. We have heard
from people who have moved to the Post Office account and then
found that their informal carer or local authority carer who normally
collects the pension is unable or unwilling to be a second card
holder so the older person has no way of accessing their money.
Practical issues around the Post Office card account
10.8 People have experienced difficulties in applying
for a card account as the scheme seems unnecessarily complicated
(although some modifications have now been made). There are also
concerns about using PIN numbers and due to worries about forgetting
these we have heard of people telling others their number or writing
it down and keeping the number in a prominent place.
10.9 There have also been difficulties with the payment
process—most notably in August when the system was shut
down for over three hours (after an error had resulted in overpayments).
One Age Concern reported that they had been contacted by older
people who had been told to come back every half an hour to see
if the system was working again.
Improving financial capability
10.10 In some cases one of the bank account options,
such as a basic bank account might be more appropriate but particularly
for people who have never had an account they may not have the
necessary support to go through the process of learning about
accounts; deciding which type of account to take out; deciding
which bank to choose; and going through the practical procedures
of opening an account including providing the necessary identification.
We know that the DWP is provided funding for some schemes to help
improve financial capability. This is welcome but there remain
many people who do not have access to sufficient support.
Third party collections
10.11 One of Age Concern's major worries has been how
the system will work for people who need their money collected
by a third party on a temporary or permanent basis. While all
banks and building societies will have arrangements, these vary,
making it difficult to advise people. Cheque payments do allow
a convenient way of allowing someone else to collect benefit but
we are still unclear on many of the details. For example if someone
normally has their money paid into a Post Office account and they
become ill on the day it's due how will they be able to arrange
for someone else to collect their pension just that week?
Cheque service
10.12 The cheque service aimed at some of the most vulnerable
older people, and those with multiple carers, relies on a weekly
postal service. Older people contacting us have expressed major
concerns about the reliability of the postal service and Age Concern
has argued that as a minimum several cheques should be issued
together so people know they can get their money on time. There
are also concerns about security, especially where people live
in shared households, and the loss of the convenient record of
payments that the order book provided.
The change to Direct Payments is causing concern and distress
for many older people. We are worried that the cheque payment
service, aimed at some of the most vulnerable older people, relies
on a weekly cheque arriving safely and on time.
11. CONCLUSION
11.1 Age Concern welcomes the increases in income that
Pension Credit has brought to many older people. However, despite
a very positive and proactive approach to its implementation the
problem of take-up remains and like any income-related system
there are major complexities, particular around the interaction
with other benefits and systems of support. For future older people
the increasing reliance on means-testing may provide a disincentive
to saving. There are improvements that can, and should be made,
but ultimately we need better non-means-tested provision, including
a much higher basic state pension.
Age Concern
September 2004
26
The impact of Pension Credit on those receiving it. Age
Concern, 2004. Back
27
Pension Credit Monthly Progress Report, September 2004. Back
28
See for example One in Four a joint Age Concern/Fawcett
Society report, 2004. Back
29
Entitled but not claiming? Pensioners, the Minimum Income
Guarantee and Pension Credit DWP research report 197. 2003. Back
30
The Pension Credit: the Government's proposals DWP, November
2001. Back
31
House of Commons Hansard 13 September 2004, 1394W. Back
32
DWP estimates of numbers eligible in 2006-07 and 2008-09 are
3.95 million and 4.25 million respectively. Back
33
Tackling pensioner poverty: encouraging take-up of entitlements
National Audit Office, 2002. Back
34
A review of the campaign to May 2004 Pension Service,
2004. Back
35
House of Commons Hansard, 8 July 2004 col 838. Back
36
Customer Experience of Direct Payment DWP. 2004. Back
| 
