I believe it would be in Andy's interests to check as soon as possible whether his employer does provide a scheme, and whether he can still join it (this may not be possible if he has already turned down the opportunity).

Pensions are often not high up on the list of priorities for younger people. However, it is normally a good idea to start pension arrangements as early as you can.

Not only are people likely receive higher pension benefit when they retire as a result of this, there is also a greater chance that they will benefit more from the tax reliefs (such as those on most investment income and growth) enjoyed by pension schemes.

The main alternative to joining a company pension scheme would normally be a stakeholder pension, due to their low charges and flexibility.

I would suggest that Andy starts by obtaining the following leaflets from the Financial Services Authority (0845-6061234) -

The leaflets also contain information on how Andy can make contact with an Independent Financial Adviser.

Jon Williams in Berkshire asks: "I understand that the EU are about to introduce a bill stopping the pension lump sum 'perk'.

"I have a pension linked mortgage, which is relying on the lump sum to pay off a large portion of my loan, so where does this new law leave me?

"Where can I get more information on this subject?"

The good news is that the EU has dropped its plans to prevent the payment of tax-free lump sums on retirement. Therefore, for the time being, you have nothing to worry about.

The government has also recently confirmed its support for the concept of a tax-free lump sum, in the recent consultation paper produced by the Inland Revenue, accompanying the government's Green Paper on pensions.

Indeed, they are proposing to standardise the level of tax-free cash available to everyone, at 25% of the value of an individual's pension benefits. This may even mean some people receive more tax-free cash.

There will doubtless be further publicity on these proposals in the summer, when the next stage of the consultation process is planned.

Paul Tumilty in Hampshire has decided to take his pension with Kingisher Plc early, age 52.

He was encouraged to take up AVC's at one stage during his employment but soon after receiving a statement of what they would produce, says he had the sense to cancel payments.

The value of his AVC's now is �3840, giving a single life pension of �84/annum. A straight division of 3840 by 84 means he'll need to reach 105 years old just to get that.

Surely with this level of return, people would be better off just putting monthly payments in an ordinary building society account?

On a point of detail �3840 divided by �84 gives 46 (rounded up). Therefore on my arithmetic, Paul would need to live to almost 98, not 105 - not that it makes much difference to the point he is are making.

The calculation Paul has made assumes it is a level pension he will be receiving, with no annual increases. This may not be the case, and if Paul does receive increases to his pension, these need to be taken into account in assessing the value of the pension.

Having said that, the value still seems poor. Paul should check the figures with the trustees of the scheme and ask for confirmation that they are correct.

He should also ask whether the trustees would consider buying him a pension with another provider on the open market. If they refuse to do this, there is an argument that they are breaching their duty to act in the members' interests.

Edric Holtham wants to know: "Are pensions paid to stakeholder pensioners taxable or free of tax?

"My wife and I have stakeholder pensions with different companies and one pays without deducting tax - the other deducts."

All pensions are classed as taxable income. Tax is usually deducted under PAYE in accordance with the pensioner's coding.

We are aware that some insurers pay the pension gross, where it is being paid annually. Any pension that is paid gross should be declared when completing a self-assessment tax form.

Similarly, if you feel your pension provider has deducted too much tax, you can ask them to check your tax code with the Inland Revenue, or claim the tax back in your end of year return.

Peter Wadhwani, Essex says: "I've read that if the total of your personal pension fund is below �10,000, you can take the full amount without taking an annuity.

"Is this correct and from what date does it apply?"

The Inland Revenue document on Simplifying Pensions published in December 2002 has put forward a proposal to allow people over 65 and whose total pension benefits from all sources do not exceed �10,000 in value, to take the whole fund in cash.

The first 25% would be tax-free whilst the remainder would be subject to income tax. However, this measure is still just a proposal and is not yet law. The government hopes to bring this (and all other Inland revenue pension reform measures) into law by April next year.

This is a change to the present position, where a full lump sum is only possible (generally speaking) where the member has reached 50, the fund value is below �2,500 and the member does not have another personal pension scheme.

John Noons from the West Midlands explains: "I paid into my employer's final paid salary scheme for 29 years and was made redundant when it closed my plant.

"At 53 years of age, I looked for and found another job, so decided to defer my pension. Given the present uncertainty of these schemes remaining in operation in many companies, should I consider taking my pension (even though this will mean I will go into the 40% tax bracket) or is my deferred pension guaranteed (protected) in law - so I can safely leave it where it is for now?"

The direct answer to John's question is that his deferred pension is only guaranteed as long as the company remains solvent and does not wind up the scheme prior to his normal retirement age.

If the winding up of the scheme commenced prior to his retirement, the level of benefit that could be secured for him will depend upon whether the scheme's finances are sufficient to cover its liabilities.

John can check the current funding level of the scheme, by requesting a copy of the latest 'Actuarial Valuation Report', as well as the 'Trustees Report and Accounts'.

John is entitled to receive these if he requests them in writing from the Trustees.

If John is considering his options, he will need to bear in mind that the early payment of retirement benefits is not usually an automatic right but instead usually requires the consent of the employer, or the trustees, or both.

If early retirement is granted, it will usually be subject to a reduction factor to take into account the period of early payment.

Members whose pensions are already in payment are currently in the highest priority category when funds are distributed and consequently where a scheme is wound up, pensioners can usually expect to see their basic entitlement secured.

If John's present employer provides a pension scheme he could explore the possibility of transferring his entitlement to it. He should however consider taking financial advice from an appropriately qualified person, before proceeding with a transfer.

He should be wary of transferring his benefits without a strong indication that he will be better off by doing so. If a transfer were made to an individual arrangement, it is unlikely that he could secure a benefit of an equivalent value to the benefits potentially payable under his final salary arrangement.

When considering his options, John should also take into account that despite the current attention given to schemes that are being wound up, many employers are still committed to supporting their pension arrangements which can provide valuable benefits for their employees in retirement.

Michele Lucas, Lancashire asks: "I have a deferred pension with the Rover group and I retire in two years. I understand that should it close before then I could lose it all, so should I take up the option of early retirement now and ensure my pension, or leave it and take the risk?"

Michele's concerns are very similar to those of John Noons.

Whether the scheme is placed into wind up at some point in the future is of course unknown and consequently it would be difficult for anyone to provide specific advice as to what Michele should do.

However, if Michele's company scheme was closed prior to her retirement, there is the possibility that the level of pension she has built up could be dramatically affected.

But employers are obliged to fund their scheme in line with a specific funding measure known as the Minimum Funding Requirement.

Although this measure does not provide for deferred members to have their benefits secured in full, it does ensure that each member would at least receive their full cash equivalent transfer value.

Consequently there should not be a situation where Michele could 'lose it all', provided her employer remains a going concern.

Although by taking early retirement, she would be in the highest member priority category and therefore would at least have her basic pension secured - remember early retirement usually requires the consent of the employer, the trustees, or both.

Any pension provided would also usually be reduced to take into account early payment. Again, to assist in her decision making Michele could consider requesting a copy of the scheme latest Trustees' Annual Report & Accounts and Actuarial Valuation Report.

This will include details of the scheme's finances and a report from the scheme's Actuary and Trustees.

Anne Thompson from the West Midlands wants to know: "When you are given a transfer value and an amount of reckonable days service from a former employer, is the full amount shown transferred to your new employer or is a percentage of it deducted from the transfer value?

"If you then change jobs again and wish to transfer your pension over to your new employer, can the employer you first transferred your pension to, then also deduct an amount from your transfer value (i.e. you lose money every time you move it)?"

Assuming this is a final salary scheme, the full transfer value should normally be the amount that is paid to a new pension arrangement.

The situation is different with a money purchase pension scheme, where there can often be a difference between the fund value and transfer value, due usually to the charges of the scheme provider.

The benefits secured in the new scheme will depend upon the type of scheme. In a final salary arrangement, they will be those benefits that the scheme expects to be able to be provide in return for the sum invested (normally in the form of added years service credit, or a fixed amount of pension).

OPAS produces a free leaflet entitled 'Transferring a pension to another scheme' which can be requested from our helpline (0845 6012923).

Nigel Turner in Essex says: "In November 1993 I joined my employer's defined benefit, final salary pension scheme.

"I was told that the company would match my 6% contribution with a contribution of c.6.3%, so I continued paying into the scheme until I left in January 1999.

"In total, I contributed �12,334.34 and when I requested a transfer value of my deferred pension in May 1999, it was �15,197.63. Surely if the company had contributed 6.3%, the total to my pension would have represented �25,285.40?

"What does the shortfall of c.�10,000 between my transfer value and estimated contributions represent?"

For a defined benefit scheme, commonly called a final salary scheme, a transfer value calculation is not related to the contributions paid.

The scheme actuary calculates the transfer value based upon the pension the member would receive at retirement that has been built up to the date of leaving. This will take into account any guaranteed pension increases due both before and after retirement.

The calculation is relatively complex, as it involves putting a current value on a pension that is due to be paid at some date in the future.

If you think that your transfer value has not been calculated correctly, you should query this in writing with the scheme trustees.

If you do not receive a satisfactory response to your enquiries, please send OPAS whatever written information you have. I would stress that if you have no reason to believe that the transfer value has been incorrectly calculated, but are simply surprised that the amount available is not larger, it is unlikely that OPAS will be able to help (e.g. where the calculation has been made by a qualified actuary).

OPAS produces a free leaflet entitled 'Transferring a pension to another scheme' which can be requested from our helpline - 0845 6012923.

Pete Leggett in North East Lincolnshire asks: "I am 56 years old and have been a member of a final salary scheme with my current employer for 35 years.

"I earn between �18 and �25k/ annum. I opted out of SERPS in the late eighties and would like to retire at 60 if possible - would I be better off opting back in?"

It is important to establish whether the final salary scheme that Pete is currently a member of, has opted out (usually referred to as contracted-out) of the State Second Pension (S2P), the successor to SERPS.

If Pete's company scheme is contracted-out, it is unlikely that individual members will be able to contract back in. This is because it is generally a condition of membership of such a scheme that you have to be contracted-out to earn benefits. Pete should contact his scheme trustees for clarification.

If, however, Pete's company scheme is not contracted-out and he has made arrangements to contract-out himself through a separate scheme (probably a personal pension plan), it would be possible for him to contract back in. Pete could do this by completing Form CA1543, which is available from his product provider.

OPAS is not able to give specific individual investment advice, such as to definitively advise anyone whether they should contract back into the State Second Pension, but we will try to help them understand the consequences of their decision.

The decision will depend on a number of factors, such as an individual's age and the amount that they earn. It is often advisable to contract back into the State Second Pension if you earn less than �11,000 per annum, due to the favourable treatment of low earners in the state scheme.

People can obtain a useful leaflet explaining the background to contracting-out entitled 'Contracted-out Pensions - Your Guide (PM7)' by calling 08457 313233.

You can also get a more detailed guide to the rebates that are given called 'Employee's guide to Minimum Contributions', by contacting the National Insurance Contributions Office on 0845 915 0150.

Michael Mahon from West Yorkshire says: "My sister is a 75 year old widow with two daughters and her total pension is approx �86. Because she can't manage, her two daughters put �5 a week into a bank account for her.

"I advised her to apply for the Minimum Income Guarantee of �98.15 but when the pension office saw her bank statements, they classed the �10 as income and said she's not entitled. This is obviously unfair but what should she do next?"

The Minimum Income Guarantee (MIG), a means tested benefit, is designed to ensure that pensioners have a minimum level of income in retirement.

But it's not true that all sources of income are taken into account.

In this example the money should be ignored as this type of voluntary payment has a weekly disregard of �20.

Consequently she should qualify for the MIG.

Michael Mahon's sister could therefore be entitled to MIG and should call the MIG Helpline (0800 028 1111).

Chris Bond and Glynis Robinson in Devon have a conundrum for you - should they get married or not?

His date of birth is 07/10/38, hers is 17/11/48, so they're entitled to fully paid-up old age pensions on 07/10/03 and 17/11/08 respectively.

But if they get married before 7th October this year, would they be entitled to the married man's pension, giving them an additional �40a week?

Or would Glynis lose her own personal entitlement at age 60 as a result?

This is a tricky one. Obviously, I can't advise Chris and Glynis whether or not they should get married. However, the general position is that, if they are married when Chris starts to claim his pension in October, he may be able to claim an increase in his pension for Glynis, providing she is financially dependant on him (i.e. not working or receiving other state benefits herself).

When Glynis reaches 60, she will be able to claim a pension in her own right, based on her own National Insurance record, Chris' record (if they get married), or a combination of the two. Any increase in Chris' pension would normally cease at that point.

Chris and Glynis should also obtain a forecast of their state benefits, based on their current circumstances. They can get this by phoning the State Pension Forecast line on 0845 3000 168.

They should also ask their local Social Security office for detailed figures as to how their marriage would affect them, as we don't know all their circumstances and as ever, the rules surrounding this are pretty complicated!

Martin Pearse, also in Devon, says: "I recently joined a leading retailer and must now choose from three pension options to invest in.

"The choices are UK equities, bonds or cash and I am able to transfer my old pension from my last employer to this one. What do you think?"

Your pension is one of your most valuable assets. The choice of how to invest any contributions is therefore a very important decision.

The type of fund you invest in will largely depend on your attitude to risk.

UK equities are far more volatile than bonds or cash, but offer the potential for greater returns in the long term.

Bonds and cash are monetary assets, which are primarily held as they are more secure, but offer comparatively lower returns (again, in the long term).

A possible approach to investment is to use what is sometimes referred to as a life-style investment strategy. You may wish to ask if your pension scheme offers this.

In a nutshell this means that in the early years you are invested in equities, which is then switched to lower risk funds nearer to retirement - to protect against stock market failure or underperformance.

Turning now to the second part of your question, you normally have the right to transfer your benefits to another pension scheme.

OPAS is not able to give specific individual investment advice, but we do try to help people to understand the choices they have.

You must assess the options that are available. The administrators of your employer's scheme may be able to help you. You should bear in mind that it may be in your best interests to retain your funds with your old pension scheme. Generally you should only transfer if there is a tangible reason for doing so.

The Financial Service Authority produces a leaflet called 'The FSA Guide to the Risks of Pension Transfers' and you can get this by calling them on 0845 606 1234.

For definitive advice on any or all of this, you should seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser in writing.

Pat Gubb in Leicestershire asks: "I pay the equivalent in AVCs every month as I pay into my superannuation final salary (local government scheme through Norwich Union).

"With the current state of pensions and the stock market, and owing to the fact that I hope to retire in two years time, would I be better stopping my AVCs and opening some other savings scheme?"

Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVCs) allow employees who are members of occupational pension schemes to secure additional retirement benefits.

As you pay no income tax on the part of your earnings used to pay AVCs, it is a tax efficient way of increasing income in retirement. Apart from increasing the level of your own pension, AVCs may be used to provide higher death benefits, earlier retirement, a larger spouse's pension or annual increase to the pension once in payment.

Members of company pension schemes have also had the alternative since 6 April 2001 of paying into a personal or stakeholder pension scheme, as long as they have earned less than �30,000 per annum in any full tax year since 6 April 2000.

No one can predict future investment performance and therefore I cannot comment on the value of Pat's AVC policy in two years time.

Another option Pat might consider however, is to ascertain whether the AVC provider has any other traditionally safer funds that she can invest her AVCs into - for example gilts and cash, as opposed to higher risk equity funds.

There are of course other savings products available other than pension arrangements that Pat could consider when retirement planning such as ISAs, savings accounts etc.

However as these are not specifically designed to provide for retirement provision they are outside the remit of OPAS. Independent financial advice should be sought with regard to these products.

Alternatively the Financial Services Authority provides a number of general guides. One of the most useful of these is a leaflet called 'The FSA guide to topping up your occupational pension' (you can contact them on 0845 606 1234).

Mr Morris in Somerset says: "I have a private pension scheme with Standard Life, started to cover a mortgage of �15,000 (taken out in 1984). It's due to mature in October 2004 when I retire and we pay �60.56 a month for this.

"We recently received a letter quoting a lump sum of between �4,500 and �6,500, which in no way covers the mortgage (the plan is part of a managed fund) and we had thought we'd be getting bonuses at the end of the policy too.

"Is there anything we can do? Fortunately, we managed to pay off our mortgage a few years ago but this is not the point."

It sounds like Mr Morris has a type of pension scheme called a 'Retirement Annuity Contract', a forerunner to the present day personal or stakeholder pensions.

The scheme's assets should basically be invested according to the policy contract. Mr Morris may well have had a degree of choice under the contract, as to the type of fund (and attaching level of risk) he exposes himself to.

Mr Morris has told us his contributions are invested in a managed fund. This type of fund usually invests in a wide range of stocks and shares, as well as holding some other investments like bonds or property.

After deduction of charges, Mr Morris' contributions would normally be used to purchase units and the value of those units can rise or fall in line with fluctuations in the value of the assets of the managed fund.

Unfortunately, there are usually no guarantees with this type of fund. Nevertheless, I believe Mr Morris should write to Standard Life asking for a full explanation for the poor investment return.