UK Women fight injustice to reduce pension age back to 60

It is really disappointing and discouraging having to face the reality that we have to cope with so many injustices in the world we live in today. This is regardless of how civilized and developed the environment or the country we live in is, as such saddening stories are observed in these countries as well.

Unluckily, UK seems the be among these countries as explained in article below. It is apparent that we need to cover a much longer distance before we can comfortably say “Yes, we do live in a fair and just world – and not only for rich but also for ordinary human beings, women to be in the first place.

“UK WOMEN FIGHT INJUSTICE TO REDUCE PENSION AGE BACK TO 60
(by a British woman residing in Turkey)

Thousands of older women are struggling with the cost of living because of a pensions “injustice” dating back years that has never been put right, according to campaigners.

They say large numbers of women born in the 1950s are having to go without or can only afford basics. Having believed they would receive their state pension at 60 many have used up their savings and do not have the financial cushion to cope with soaring living costs

Fresh demands for action from the group known as Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) have coincided with a separate campaign to highlight errors that have led to women being wrongly told they are not entitled to a state pension.

This is being spearheaded by former pensions minister Steve Webb, who says some women who have been told they weren’t entitled to anything were actually due payments of more than £4,000 a year.

While these are separate issues, both have particularly affected women born in the 1950s.

WASPI (WOMEN AGAINST STATE PENSION INEQUALITY) FOUNDED 7 YEARS AGO

Waspi was founded seven years ago to fight for compensation for women who lost out because of the way changes to the state pension age (SPA) were made. For decades the SPA for women was 60. An increase to 65, phased in between 2010 and 2020, was included in the Pensions Act 1995, but in 2011 the coalition government pushed through a speeding-up of the process. As a result, the SPA for women increased to 65 by November 2018, and then to 66 by October 2020.

Many say they had always expected to receive their pension at 60 then discovered their SPA had increased by four, five or six years. The government did not write to any woman affected by the rise for nearly 14 years after the law was passed in 1995.

A petition was recently lodged to put the UK state pension age back to 60 as it used to be. The Government’s response was; “Parliament has voted to equalise the State Pension age and subsequent retirement ages for men and women. Reducing it to 60 is neither affordable nor fair to tax payers and future generations.”

BACK TO 60 MOVEMENT WINS RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW TAKES DWP TO HIGH COURT

However, a campaign called “Back to 60 movement” won the right to a Judicial Review and took the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to the High Court in 2019. The case was rejected.

The WASPI campaigners then asked the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to investigate the way they had been treated.

The WASPI campaigners then asked the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to investigate the way they had been treated.

The Ombudsman is not a court but can recommend compensation where maladministration causes injustice. His initial investigation report, published in 2021, found clear maladministration in the communication of pensions law changes and complaint handling but failed to find that this led to financial loss and lost opportunities.

HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF WOMEN MAY MISS OUT ON COMPENSATION THEY ARE OWED

The WASPI women argue this means hundreds of thousands of women may miss out on the compensation they feel they are owed and so have announced their intention to seek a High Court Judicial Review against the Ombudsman.

WASPI’s supporters have helped to reach the target of £100,000 to get the judicial review case into court and well on its way. This target has now been extended to £150,000 and the lawyers have reached out to the Ombudsman to discuss whether arrangements can be made to make the costs manageable and predictable all the way to the full hearing of the judicial review. To keep updated on the Judicial Review process please keep reading the updates on the ‘crowdjustice’ page.”