Waspi women cheated yet again!!

I think it's going too far to claim that this government hates old people. Presumably it hates families with more than two children too - and those claiming sickness and disability benefits.

growstuff

I think it's going too far to claim that this government hates old people. Presumably it hates families with more than two children too - and those claiming sickness and disability benefits.

Yep 👍

This didn't affect me, I'm too old! but I do remember hearing about it at the time. I think the main despicable issue now is not who knew what, but that Labour in opposition seized upon this issue, championed it in order to gain political advantage to the point of actively campaigning, expressing furious indignation promising to right this appalling injustice at the first opportunity! They probably were relying on the Ombudsmen report being unfavourable to these ladies which would have conveniently got them off the hook. When the didn't happen, another excuse had to be found pretty smartly, so the black hole was born! This doubled up for the cancelling of the WFA, which also,before the election was apparently not going to be removed, but afterwards, within days, was. It's the hypocrisy,lies, and deception that is so despicable.

Is it worth having an Ombudsman?

If the government can find big money to fund NHS and train drivers' pay increases, not to mention contaminated blood and Post Office claims, why not the Waspis?

growstuff

OK! I'll look for the survey and if I find it, I'll post the link. Beware! I think some people will be offended by the conclusions which were drawn about those who didn't know.

(PS. Don't shoot the messenger.)

If I'm 'some people', I won't be offended . I am more offended that other women refuse to believe them. There is so much snobbery around issues like these, and it doesn't help anyone.

As I've said, I knew but don't remember how I found out. I may have read it, I may have been told, it may have been something attached to a payslip (we did get information in that way back then), or someone may have told me - I don't know. I do know that I didn't get a letter, and that is on record.

If I'd worked early shifts alone in an office as a cleaner, rather than being surrounded by people all day, if English wasn't my first language, if I hadn't been in a union, or if none of my friends knew about it, I can well imagine not knowing. Many women didn't.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

I think it's going too far to claim that this government hates old people. Presumably it hates families with more than two children too - and those claiming sickness and disability benefits.

Yep 👍

Really? You conclude that the government hates those groups for carrying on the policies brought in by the previous one?

Doodledog

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

I think it's going too far to claim that this government hates old people. Presumably it hates families with more than two children too - and those claiming sickness and disability benefits.

Yep 👍

Really? You conclude that the government hates those groups for carrying on the policies brought in by the previous one?

I don't think the government hates any particular group.

Doodledog

growstuff

OK! I'll look for the survey and if I find it, I'll post the link. Beware! I think some people will be offended by the conclusions which were drawn about those who didn't know.

(PS. Don't shoot the messenger.)

If I'm 'some people', I won't be offended . I am more offended that other women refuse to believe them. There is so much snobbery around issues like these, and it doesn't help anyone.

As I've said, I knew but don't remember how I found out. I may have read it, I may have been told, it may have been something attached to a payslip (we did get information in that way back then), or someone may have told me - I don't know. I do know that I didn't get a letter, and that is on record.

If I'd worked early shifts alone in an office as a cleaner, rather than being surrounded by people all day, if English wasn't my first language, if I hadn't been in a union, or if none of my friends knew about it, I can well imagine not knowing. Many women didn't.

I don't think you're even in the cohort affected, so you can't be one of the 'some people'.

It's not snobbery when a survey finds that certain groups were more likely not to know than others. They include those not in work, those with little interest in current affairs and those with lower educational qualifications.

It was confirmed in the PHSO report that I was in a cohort to whom the DWP did not write:

www.ombudsman.org.uk/publications/womens-state-pension-age-our-findings-department-work-and-pensions-communication/what-did-happen

114. The proposed schedule for issuing letters included women who turned 60 between April 2010 and May 2015. We have seen no evidence of what – if anything – DWP proposed to do to tell women who turned 60 after May 2015 (whose State Pension age had increased to 65 under the 1995 Act).

I turned 60 in June 2015 so a month too young to be told.

I was widowed in 2007 and claimed Bereavement Allowance for 12 months - the ongoing widow’s pension having been abolished in 2001. In the correspondence for that, the DWP told me that I would receive State Pension when I was 60. That was the only correspondence I ever received.

Twelve years after the Pensions Act 1995 and the DWP were still giving out wrong information. The PHSO mentions this in his report.

I finally received SP when I was 66.

I am very tired of other women telling me that I should have known. When I read the PHSO report I realised why. If other women would bother to read the report they would also realise how and why some women were never told.

I worked in a professional environment comprising about 50% women of similar ages and have no recollection of it ever being discussed.

Bear in mind that people should be given 15 years notice of pension changes. That's in the PHSO report too. That’s why the Pension Act 1995 affected women who would have reached SP age from 2010. Only eight years before I thought I would receive SP, I had received a DWP confirming that to be the case. Why would I think that was wrong?

This 2004 survey for the DWP shows that only 46% of women in managerial and professional occupations and who were affected by the changes were aware of their SPA. In other words 54% were unaware so there were many women like me.

The percentage of those who were unaware was even worse for those women in routine and manual occupations many of whom had no private pension provision. 62% were unware of their SPA. Section 3.3:

webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107093842/http:/research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2003-2004/rrep221.pdf

It’s those latter women who have been most affected, had little choice but to go on working for another six years as they had no private pension to fall back on. These are the same women who may have enough years for a full New State Pension but have no private pension and have now lost WFP as they are just a few pounds over the Pension Credit limit.

FlitterMouse Where did you get the idea that people should be given 15 years' notice of pension changes.

When the 2011 changes were introduced, it was stated that people should be given 10 years' notice for this and future changes.

The percentage of those who were unaware was even worse for those women in routine and manual occupations

There we have it.

This was the group of women who were most likely not to know about the changes. It's not snobbery to report that.

I’m a waspi born in 58 and I did know about the changes . I’m self employed and my accountant informed me. I have the letter . I also have a letter from dwp and read stuff in the financial pages and on tv .
Most of my friends and family members also knew of the changes .
But I can understand that women whose first language isn’t English would not be aware or women in low income jobs .

Incidentally, the report said:

"DWP research in 2003/2004 looked specifically at public awareness of State Pension age equalisation, and was reported in October 2004. 62% of working age women knew State Pension age was going to rise. This increased to 73% amongst all respondents aged 45 to 54 (women born in the 1950s would have been aged 45 to 54 in 2004). But only 43% of all women affected by the changes knew their State Pension age was 65, or between 60 and 65 years."

73% of the women who have been affected did know that state pension was going to rise, but they didn't know the exact age.

growstuff

FlitterMouse Where did you get the idea that people should be given 15 years' notice of pension changes.

When the 2011 changes were introduced, it was stated that people should be given 10 years' notice for this and future changes.

It's in the PHSO report under *What should have happened*:

www.ombudsman.org.uk/publications/womens-state-pension-age-our-findings-department-work-and-pensions-communication/what-should-have-happened-relevant-standards

65. And a 2005 Pensions Commission report recommended that a core principle of pension reform should involve ‘significant pre-warning of changes in [State Pension age]’, so that people approaching retirement know exactly when they will become eligible to receive their State Pension. The report suggested at least 15 years’ notice be given.

FlitterMouse Why would people whose only income is the new state pension be over the limit for Pension Credit? Currently, they would be eligible for Pension Credit, so would keep their WFP.

FlitterMouse

growstuff

FlitterMouse Where did you get the idea that people should be given 15 years' notice of pension changes.

When the 2011 changes were introduced, it was stated that people should be given 10 years' notice for this and future changes.

It's in the PHSO report under *What should have happened*:

www.ombudsman.org.uk/publications/womens-state-pension-age-our-findings-department-work-and-pensions-communication/what-should-have-happened-relevant-standards

^65. And a 2005 Pensions Commission report recommended that a core principle of pension reform should involve ‘significant pre-warning of changes in [State Pension age]’, so that people approaching retirement know exactly when they will become eligible to receive their State Pension. The report suggested at least 15 years’ notice be given.^

Thank you for the reply. However, the mention of 15 years' notice is only a suggestion. Nowhere is it written in stone as a law. The 2011 changes did include the condition that people should be given 10 years' notice, which is what I was given.

Shinamae

HousePlantQueen

madeleine45

I was already having a bad day, but now I am absolutely furious. Just put the tv on to hear the news headlines. Wish I hadnt as I am fuming so much that cant see me getting much sleep now!!! As usual ,women are being put last, cheated and being defraud4d from both sets of government morons. They have all gone back on their word and if it had been a private company they would be indited for fraud!!! I worked for 11 years paying full stamp, then went abroad and paid class 3 which was more expensive and you got no use from it for the years you were abroad,. It was said to keep you up to date for your retirement, so as far as I see it they stole my money on false pretences. I then stayed at home as I adopted my son (in financial terms I got no maternity leave and actually saved the country money as I brought up my son, which would have cost the country money if he had been in a childrens home.) At that time I was told to go onto married womens stamp. I asked if that kept me up to date and was told yes and that I would g et a pension at the age of 60. So I have never claimed any benefit, done without holidays and no new furniture or cars, but worked and paid my bills . As an honest person I believed that when the government said that I would get a pension at 60 , that it was the truth. Huh!! They constantly moved the goal posts, made it impossible to claim a hard eared pension. If the company pension quoted that it would be received at age 60, you would get it , but when it was sneakily written that you would receive the money at "pensionable" age so that you didnt even have that part of your pension. Now, those of us who tried to be responsible, spent time and effort working out how we would cover our bills with the pension, only to find that as they had reneged on their promises, and all your care and effort was thrown in your face. We coped through a rise of mortgage to 15% at one time so there are people who have very short memories regarding the cost of housing! Having done all this to find that yet again we are absolutely CHEATED and lied to and who is getting the money? well the men of course! I particularly remember that when I worked in Overseas Telegrams I earned £11 a week. That year I also paid SIP of £11 So a whole weeks wage went into that SIP. I still have the insulting letter from the pension people telling me that I would get 6p on my pension , that (I think )comes out to 5p. I could have done something worthwhile with that weeks wage, and now to add insult to injury they think they can get away with this. Well on top of working , and bringing up a family I have (as many other women have) done a lot of voluntary work over the years. Since I have lived in North Yorkshire I did 10 years of 3 days a week hospital car service, where they just paid the petrol. Thinking about that I suggest that all we WASPI women and friends should be Wasps and sting where it hurts. We do not want to let down all the people we help of course, but they want to have days for this and that . Well we should choose a day, (perhaps my birthday would be one possibility!) and give good notice to the people we help and then literally if every retired wonan , just for that one day did not do their usual things, and other women supported us, I think we could make a big statement and show these people just exactly what we do, and how much would be missed if we stopped doing it. Many women have moved with their husbands job and done part time work to fit in with family commitments, and I am sure that there must be millions of pounds in little bits of pensions that we have never seen that is rightfully ours, which has gone into pension pots that we have not seen a penny . Well enough of a rant for tonight. I need to stomp off to bed. I will need some J S Bach to soothe me , but also I hope to put my hands on my cd of Arvo Parts Spiegel im Spiegel. It is a wonderful calming piece and when I shut my eyes, I see drops of rain falling into a lake and the rings going outward. I know one thing, it has been good to be able to come on here and feel that someone will read it at some point. I have written letters and been involved in trying to do something about this situation, but as they say, I have the bit between my teeth now, and I shall do as much as I can to be involved in any campaign going. I would say that this is the modern day version of the suffragettes movement. Grrrr!!! Goodnight fellow GN and will be interested to see your comments.

Sorry, lost interest after the first (non) paragraph.

How bloody rude!

HPQ posts are very unpleasant, both on this thread and on most others.

I agree but why then did the 1995 Act legislate to affect women born after 5 April 1950 who would otherwise have received SP from 2010? That's fifteen years.

FlitterMouse

I agree but why then did the 1995 Act legislate to affect women born after 5 April 1950 who would otherwise have received SP from 2010? That's fifteen years.

No idea, but just because something happens once, it doesn't set a precedent. In fact, the first women who would have received their state pension at 65 under the 1995 Act (of whom I was one) were given 25 years' notice.

growstuff

Doodledog

growstuff

OK! I'll look for the survey and if I find it, I'll post the link. Beware! I think some people will be offended by the conclusions which were drawn about those who didn't know.

(PS. Don't shoot the messenger.)

If I'm 'some people', I won't be offended . I am more offended that other women refuse to believe them. There is so much snobbery around issues like these, and it doesn't help anyone.

As I've said, I knew but don't remember how I found out. I may have read it, I may have been told, it may have been something attached to a payslip (we did get information in that way back then), or someone may have told me - I don't know. I do know that I didn't get a letter, and that is on record.

If I'd worked early shifts alone in an office as a cleaner, rather than being surrounded by people all day, if English wasn't my first language, if I hadn't been in a union, or if none of my friends knew about it, I can well imagine not knowing. Many women didn't.

I don't think you're even in the cohort affected, so you can't be one of the 'some people'.

No need to be snippy. Your post addressed mine, so I replied. The 'Some People' thing is always problematic on here.

I have said more than once that yes, I am affected, not that it matters. I can think beyond my own circumstances, which is the point I am making.

The groups you mention as less likely to have known are the exact same ones that I mentioned in my post. My comment about snobbery was not about that - if I'd thought it snobbish to say that I would hardly have brought it up. It was about people insisting that everyone must have a life like their own, and because they knew about it, so should everyone.

It comes across as a refusal to acknowledge that others don't have the advantages they do, as though they are blissfully unaware that any other way of life even exists, so far is it from their existence.

I wasn't being snippy. I meant what I wrote ie. "some people". As I was addressing your post, I would have written "you", if I had meant you.

I don't recognise your definition of snobbery.

If you honestly think I have advantages in my current life, I would like to invite you to live in my shoes for a few days. I do, incidentally, acknowledge that some people are not so aware of current affairs as I am and have been since I was a child, which is about the only 'advantage' I have.

I do, incidentally, acknowledge that some people are not so aware of current affairs as I am and have been since I was a child, which is about the only 'advantage' I have.

That comes across as very patronising.

Allira

^I do, incidentally, acknowledge that some people are not so aware of current affairs as I am and have been since I was a child, which is about the only 'advantage' I have.^

That comes across as very patronising.

Sigh!

What would you call it when people on GN go on about holidays, meals out and buying stuff which I could never afford? Maybe you could tell them to shut up because it sometimes upsets me.

I have very little materially. Just about the only 'advantage' I have is that I had an excellent education, which will be with me forever, and a father who had a great interest in current affairs and talked to his children as though they were adults. The last thing I am is a snob.

Maybe you'd be happier if I acted dumb.

Maybe criticising people with a good knowledge of current affairs is a form of the 'politics of envy'.