There is now a briefing paper on this topic on the website of the BBC pensioners' association.

This is interesting: I had heard nothing about the proposed PIE, so I wrote to the pensions unit. This is their reply:

"As you live overseas, I regret that the PIE option is not available to you.  To take up the offer you would need to receive financial advice and the company that the BBC has chosen is not authorised to give advice outside of the UK."

This seems bizarre and highly discriminatory. Is the BBC saying that financial advice is compulsory, and solely from the advisor of its choosing? From what I've heard about PIE, I don't think it's for me, but it would be good to have the option.

I don't know why you were told Chris West that you can't have the offer as you are overseas, but where are you? I am in Europe, clearly. Also the letter I have says
What if you live outside the UK?  
etc etc
So they are offering to some who are not UK residents.
Otherwise, cynically, if like me you are about to be 55, and female then you could be one of the most potentially costly for the BBC on the RPI deal, as women tend to live longer.  But that said, personally I don't think my little pension is worth their investment in paying for financial advice, though personally I am grateful for it.
Please can Ian Pollock explain how you understand that as you wrote:
"My reading of the BBC's letter suggests that the offer would involve not the payment of a lump sum to us, but a permanent uplift in our monthly pensions. Obviously we await details."  Can you explain a bit more about this please?
I am just worried that I only have two months as my letter was late, to make this decision. Carol

I wrote to the BBC director of finance outlining my concerns about overseas pensioners not being eligible for PIE, and to be fair, I got a rapid reply. As expected, no change in the corporate line: "the BBC and the BBC Pension Scheme decided to exclude overseas pensioners from the option.  This is to protect pensioners from making uninformed decisions without the necessary support, rather than excluding them simply because they live abroad."

I'm leaving it there, I don't think PIE is for me anyway. Not sure about me, but my younger wife, who will inherit my pension, must have a good 30 years or more left to enjoy it.

Welcome Martyn P (for Parker)!
No harm in being a newbie here - after all we were all one at some point!!

Well PIE is proving to be interesting.
Although the 'regulations' relating to pensions have all been changed by Gideon, there is some method in his madness!
It's all really about getting his tax-take as soon as possible really. After all, if you exceed the amount you can take from your pot without paying tax, (some 30% when I last checked) then he's rubbing his hands with a certain amount of glee! He'll be getting your Income Tax rather earlier than he would have been doing without you taking up the PIE offer.

Undoubtedly, if you're in good health and have a family who've lived long before you, then you'll be looking forward to many years of an increasing pension: and all the while the Chancellor is moving the point below which you pay little/no tax on any 'income' upwards.

If you are tempted, then to me the break point would be related to the point at which you're going to pay the higher rate of Income Tax.

I'm sure that as a long-serving member of Group 2, your pension won't be all that bad (although that's always rather "subjective"!) so if the extra "uplift" you'd get by trading in future raises for more income now, then if that raise would make you liable for 40% tax rather than 30% then I'd postulate that you'd rather keep those annual increases for when you won't be liable for the higher rate.
Nevertheless, should you be desirous of spending 'a serious lump of cash' - and want to do that now! - at least you have the opportunity of getting at more of what you've earned right now. I, on the other hand, didn't have that option when I left Auntie, and had to go down the route of an Annuity with the extra savings I had made from EDP and the like. Gideon has now changed all that so that should I wish I could buy that Annuity sum back (less, of course, what the present provider - Aviva - wishes to charge me for doing so!) and then Gideon will have his percentage of that sum too, since I'd already withdrawn the maximum 1/3rd in cash prior to arranging the annuity (which somehow seems pitifully small compared to my pension!).

At the end of the day, whether it's the right option for you will ultimately depend on how long you live - and unless you've developed a useful facility of seeing into the future whilst in The Tennis Club, no one really knows how long we each have on this earth! The other aspect is just how much of your pension was earned before April 1997 (and I do remember you were around prior to that time! ) since it's only that bit which is subject to the PIE uplift. Anything earned after 1997 will still receive an annual increase, so you'll need to know how much of your current pension was earned prior to that point, to see how much the remaining part of your existing amount will increase year-on-year.

I doubt this has really helped since each situation is so different. I'm not taking up my option since strictly I don't absolutely need it to keep the wolf from the door. YMMV (as they say!) - but I hope you can see just a little clearer. By all means talk to the people the Beeb has made available to us, but at the end of the day they are being paid by the Beeb to reduce its future Pension 'liability' whether that is overtly stated or not.

I am tempted to take the offer. Of course this is a personal decision as each recipient has different offers and circumstances.

In my case the offer is worth an extra £5,500 plus an annual RPI increase based on 50% of my existing pension. I am still relatively young (I don't get the State Pension yet). The PIE offer would not take me into the 40% tax bracket. Don't forget you only pay 40% tax on that amount over the threshold, not on the whole amount.

Chase DeVere told me that they would not advise me one way or another as in my case, it was not a clear cut matter. I do have to save for holidays and non essential items, so the extra now would allow me to enjoy life a little more whilst still young enough to do so.

I worked out a spreadsheet based on assumptions of the RPI, and it would be another 12-14 years until I would be at the "cross over" point. In the meantime I could have "enjoyed" around £50,000!

With the present RPI being so low, 2016 pension increases would be in double figures in my case.

I am fortunate to own a house that I could downsize if money gets tight after this cross over point.

I would be eager to hear if anyone else is thinking it is a good idea to accept the PIE offer?

To those who believe this PIE exercise is just a ploy by the BBC to reduce the pension liability:

Like others, I thought the offer was to be a one-off payment rather than a continuing uplift.

So, when I received the original letter back in September, I requested to be removed from the scheme.

Having realised my mistake, I have just asked to be reinstated, but have been told I'm too late.

So, they are not exactly desperate to sign up as many people as possible.

Of course, this was totally my mistake, but that doesn't stop me being upset at possibly missing out on a good deal.

On the other hand, my pension has exactly doubled over the last 20 years and, now 70, I could well get another 20 or more.

So, maybe I've had a lucky escape.

I'll report back in January 2036 and let you know!

Any idea how many pensioners took up the PIE offer in the end