DWP's 'Bonkers' Pension Rule Leaves 60,000 Couples £7,000 Worse Off
A pension rule branded as "unfair" and "bonkers" is leaving state pensioner couples a staggering £7,000 worse off annually. The charity Independent Age has revealed that older couples are being forced to live on tiny incomes due to this Department for Work and Pensions policy.
The Mixed-Age Couples Rule
The DWP's controversial mixed-age couples rule was introduced in 2019 and prevents people of state pension age from claiming pension credit if their spouse is below age 66. This policy has been slammed by campaigners who argue it creates unnecessary financial hardship for vulnerable households.
Independent Age warns that approximately 60,000 low-income couples are being barred from accessing higher benefits as a direct result of this regulation. Government figures analyzed by the charity show that affected couples could be losing around £5,900 per year on average, with some experiencing losses as high as £7,000.
Real-Life Impacts
The charity recently received a distressing call from a 79-year-old individual who was unable to claim pension credit because their partner is only 59 years old. Under the current rule, this couple will have to wait until the older partner reaches 87 before they can access this crucial financial support.
In another case, Andy Cressey from Goole, Yorkshire explained how this rule will affect his family: "My partner June who is three years younger than me will be affected when I get to the retirement age of 67 in 2028. From the information I have found, June will have to claim universal credit and my state pension will be taken into account with a pound for pound reduction in the amount she can claim."
"This effectively means we will both have to live off my state pension alone," Cressey continued. "I have also discovered that if we live apart, the council will pay my full rent and council tax as I will be a pensioner, and my partner would have a full claim with universal credit. So we will be better off if we do not live together, which is absolutely ridiculous."
Cressey added: "Why should I have to pay rent and council tax when I live with my younger partner, and she will have very little, if any, income herself? The system is bonkers to say the least."
Broader Implications
This policy creates a perverse incentive where couples might consider living apart to access better financial support, undermining family stability and creating additional emotional strain. The rule disproportionately affects older, vulnerable couples who rely on state benefits as their primary income source.
Independent Age continues to campaign for changes to this regulation, arguing that it unfairly penalizes mixed-age couples and creates unnecessary financial hardship during retirement years when people should be able to enjoy financial security.
