serotoninsid
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,754
A relative was denied a full contributory pension on the basis that she had worked a job in the 50's (lasted a few months) - she worked ten years in the '90s.
If she had not worked the job in the 50's, she would have been entitled to the full pension based on the ten years worked in more recent times.
Can anyone shed any light on the logic (there may well not be any but if there is, it would be interesting to know) behind this?
Usually its a case of not having worked enough - this appears to be reverse logic. Needless to say, She has rang Sligo and asked the question but a phone call to that place never leaves the caller any further up the path to enlightenment.
If she had not worked the job in the 50's, she would have been entitled to the full pension based on the ten years worked in more recent times.
Can anyone shed any light on the logic (there may well not be any but if there is, it would be interesting to know) behind this?
Usually its a case of not having worked enough - this appears to be reverse logic. Needless to say, She has rang Sligo and asked the question but a phone call to that place never leaves the caller any further up the path to enlightenment.