High Court Backto60 review

I’m keeping an eye out - the case is being heard in the High Court tomorrow 6 June apparently.

Fingers crossed!

Thanks Urmstongran. On Radio Scotland they said it would start today, but these things are never precise as they sometimes spend the first day or two setting out who will speak when and doing the paperwork.

This from the BBC 8 hours ago:

“Up until 2010, women received their state pensions at the age of 60 but that has been rising since then.

The retirement age of both men and women will increase steadily to 67 by 2028.

While most campaigners support pension age equality, they are claiming sex discrimination in the judicial review.

They argue that the lack of notice and the speed of the change have resulted in women being disadvantaged.
Campaign group Women against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) says it is not against equalisation: "But we do not accept the unfair way the changes to our state pension age were implemented with inadequate or no notice."

One woman who had been affected said:

Timandra French, a 64-year-old ambulance driver from Margate, said she had just 14 months' notice that she wouldn't get her pension at 60, but instead have to wait until she was 65.
"It makes me feel angry, depressed, put upon," she says.
Ms French says she has struggled to continue in her "physically and emotionally" demanding job, which requires her to carry people up and down stairs as well as heavy bags.
"I'm at the stage now where I'm finding it pretty impossible to continue. I'm struggling," she says.
Ms French calculates that the pension payments she would have received had she retired at 60, would be worth "something like £49,000".

Just to clarify The Backto60 Judicial Review hearing is over 2 days 5th & 6th June. This is only just be ing mentioned in the mainstream media as there has up until now been a media blackout regarding the campaign.

I have also had a battle with HMRC and DWP over voluntary NI Contribution payment made for 3 years of some £2,300 which the HMRC lost. 3 weeks of constantly ringing and being ping ponged between them with no one wanting to take responsibility. I eventually found out the 3 years NI had been incorrectly posted against incorrect years (payments made prior to 2016/17 New Pension don’t count to increase the pension if your due get a pension under the new scheme). My original correspondence and payment reference stated contribution would be for 2016/17, 2017/18 & 2018/19).

Fortunately, my tenacity eventually paid off, and the increased amount has been added and I have received the correct back payment. I just kept telephoning and speaking to different people (sometimes 2 or 3 people a day) until I got a person who would actually do something to push it through, when the others would just tell me to wait and that it takes time and try calling in three weeks!

Hi Redtop1, it's slightly reassuring that I'm not the only one and thanks for sharing. My own view is that the financial authorities should be taking the utmost care to get things right for us as many of us are finding the going precarious beyond 60.

Plans made over many years between us and our partners/families are on hold and we should not have to struggle to get simple answers, particularly when we are getting mixed messages or no messages at all.

I've been promised confirmation letters from HMRC and the National Insurance people since February. Both say not to worry, they have the situation under control.

What they do, indeed, have is my money to cover NI contributions. They just don't seem to know where they put it.

Getting through to anyone is an absolute nightmare.

It feels like we have been binned, which only adds insult to injury. At the very least I hope the review leads to us being able to access good information and being able to see exactly what our futures hold.

And, most important, what have they done with the savings they are raking in at present from having half the population on hold for state pension?

I was born in 1962 and my DH and I are devastated by these changes. We have an 11 year age gap and had planned to retire together when I was 60 and him 71 . Recent changes mean I will have to work until I am 67 and 4 months. I honestly don't think my DH will make it to 78 !

Exactly Caledonail4
I also wonder what happens to money paid into pensions for those who don’t live to see it. Anyone know?

Money paid into pensions by those who don't live to see it is simply part of the overall allocation and is paid out to other pensioners...

The state pension doesn't work like private pensions. We don't build a personal pension 'pot' in the same way.

So the government keep the money ‘saved’ by austerity measures (WASPI) and what would have been paid to those deceased. I see.

Yep, born in 1958, no pension until I'm 66! At least my prescriptions are now foc.

Interesting interview on Woman's Hour today, a very logical, sensible argument was put forward.

What was it phoenix?

A compromise would be good.

Thank you for you OP Caledonail.

The Oap is not a benefit we have been denied. It was part of a contract we entered into when we began working, and for most of us, that was over 40 years ago.

I am on of those who has to wait for her pension. I have a partner and my own occupational pension so we can keep the wolf from the door, but nevertheless, all the dreams I had for a carefree life once retired have vanished. My income is quite paltry.

I know of several women, still working, of my age and they have no choice. The lack of a very gradual introduction of the new pension age is what has affected women born in the 1950s, along with scant notification and a moving of the goalposts.

The government seem impenetrable over this.There are so many tales of women in their 60s facing and enduring real hardship and fear because they have been denied their state pension at a time when their energy levels and health are waning.

Interesting article on the first day of the judicial review in The Guardian (sorry unsure how to link this)

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/05/women-born-in-1950s-take-fight-against-rising-pension-age-to-court?fbclid=IwAR2885MQ_dwa2AZD89P_lHVTUmXhBtIdh4HdVTayGsYPKg-H6THhpDBhedI

Caledonian if your NI for last year was paid to HMRC keep onto them as they must have put it somewhere, don’t give up make a nuisance of yourself with them, ask for a supervisor. They seem to be making so many mistakes, you almost have to do their job for them.

There’s very good information for anyone who needs it on a Facebook page called UK State Pension & Workplace Age Discrimination Discussion Group (sorry I can’t attach a link) - but lots of useful accurate information there in the help pages as well as posts from knowledgeable people from various backgrounds - if that’s helpful for anyone?

Me? - well I’m just quietly observing from the sidelines - and waiting an extra 6 years for my pension.......but aggrieved at having made important earlier life decisions that were firmly based on the government premise at that time of retirement at age 60 rather than 66 (- and not anticipating redundancy followed by bereavement).

A whole extra 6 years wait is too unfair, 6 years is a significant period of time within the total of anyone’s working life.

I would have been happy to accept a longer lead-in time, of say one year increase in retirement age say for each decade going forwards from 1996, as an example.

I didn't realise that I would have to wait until 66 to get my pension, I was born in 1957 and have worked all my life and had no children. The DWP have also messed up my pension forecast twice. I've just found out that I'll not even get a full pension despite having worked since I was 18 as my employer contracted me out and the DWP want around £8k off me to get a near full pension. Women that have spent a life on the dole will get more than me. Sorry but I am bitter.

Americanpie and Synchroswimmer

Ladies you are not alone there are so many 1950’s women in similar situation. Backto60 Facebook page has loads of supportive, friendly women all in the same boat.

I am trying to be positive and praying for a good outcome from the court case tomorrow. The group raised £40,000 in 10 days to fund one of the best legal teams headed up by the very high profile Mr Michael Mansfield QC (Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence and many more).

Praying for a favourable outcome.

I wont hold my breath about this but I am livid that they have tens of thousands of pounds that should have been in my pocket not the real scroungers in the country while Lizzie hands out wine at over £9000 a bottle.I've been working since 1969 and I haven't got a pension yet ..thats 50 years .My friend who has never paid NI tells me she spoke to someone at the DWP and was told she'll still get a full pension....wheres the justice in that ?

It was broadcast in all the media 25 years ago that women's retirement age would rise to 66.
Everyone, therefore had plenty of time to get their affairs in order.
Saying that you didn't know means that you were either in the middle of the Sahara without a signal, or you were asleep for 1/4 century.
It's only in the past 12 months that the age has been upwardly adjusted to 67.
If you carry on working until 66 (and none of you work down a mine or on a building site which would be more strenuous) then you will be earning more than your state pension so it's a win win situation.
One women I know, knew from the age of 40 that her retirement would be a further 6 years away and made appropriate arrangements so that she could stop work at 60, not the projected 66.
The DWP made and make public announcements in/on various media and if you missed them...?

women woman

Gabriella the changes were supposed to be phased in very gradually and at one stage I was told unofficially by an accountant friend who did keep an eye on these things that I would be retiring at 62, which I thought I could just about cope with at that late stage, but did not realise how hard it would be to get or keep employment in my late 50s.

Eventually, when I was well past 62, the DSS told me (after many and extensive, expensive phone calls) it would be 65, which was the first official word. Now (after a further lengthy process) they have said it'll be 66 but - as I explained - they are in such a mess with the NI payments that we have to fight to pay them and they send letters saying you don't need to pay these any more but if you stop you might lose out in future as they cover more than pensions.

And then they lose the record, or promise letters of confirmation and don't send them.

Until the last financial year, self-employed women over 60 were mysteriously barred from making voluntary or top-up NI payments if they did their books online. That may have been a computer glitch and it may have been fixed, but it has caused confusion and - potentially - further future poverty or exclusion.

I am not in this next position, but many women were told they did not have to worry about paying what was called the full stamp as they would be covered by their husband's contributions.

Your post is unhelpful and insulting to the thousands of us who are now struggling. I have met many women, even in much higher income brackets than mine, who are having difficulties because of the way the changes were accelerated and the mess officialdom is making all round.

I am sad to see such a post which implies little understanding of a very serious situation and does not add in any way to the solution but seems likely to divert the very supportive and sympathetic thread tone so far onto an ancient argument about people not spotting a change in a nationally-understood contract and being wrongly to blame for Tory austerity and George Osborne's sneaky acceleration of the time frame when he spotted a soft target.

Caledonail4 well said , I was a full time working single mum and just couldn’t afford to make any future financial plans.

Caledonail4
Oh dear. Apologies for appearing unsympathetic but sympathy doesn't solve anything.
9 years ago Brexit wasn't on the horizon.
9 years ago Trump wasn't the POTUS
9 years ago we in the UK (according to remainers) were doing fine.
In the intervening years, without a crystal ball, our government realised with dismay that older people were living longer and that would continue but that the state pension provision was such that it could not sustain the growing number of retirees.
Although it was put out into the public arena 25 years ago, it takes time for these changes to be discussed at all levels and implemented, which it was in 2011.
Whilst your and my finances can change rapidly due to various circumstances so can a country's economy, albeit rather more slowly, however, neither we nor they have a crystal ball to predict the future decades ahead.
I think 9 years is a not unreasonable timescale to make further provision for one's retirement when it is delayed by 6 years, after all, 66 is considered to be no real age at all nowadays.
I worked until I was 68 before claiming my pension, 8 years after I could have received it.
I read that in 201, the then Chancellor claimed no-one within 14 years of retirement would be affected.
These are only my views and I agree that they may not chime with the voices on here.
I do wonder how much notice (of the changes) you would like to have been given.

201 2011

Gabriella you were lucky.
You could have claimed your pension at 60.

You had the choice to defer your pension by 8 years.

So not only are you £50,000 richer than us waspi women, you receive a larger defered pension

A win win for you.
A lose lose for us