UK GNer aged 60 to 75? Take this survey - £50 voucher to be won!

I am not happy with having to wait until I am 66 to get my state pension I was born in 1960, when I started work SPA was 60 and it has changed for me now about 3 times...as far as I understand nobody is fighting for those born in the sixites, the goalpost changed for us too. I agree men and women should have the same retirement age but i think a longer , fairer implementaton should have been put in place. I can't quite remember but I think first I found when it became possible to log onto government system to get predition about your state pension. MY enquiry returned the first notification it would not be when i was 60. I do believe we all have to take responsibility for finding out information that is important to us and affects us, ourselves and if you did not do that were you a solitary worker, kept in the dark. I distinctly remember many conversations about this in my workplace!

If this 'compensation' is paid, surely, under E.U. anti-discrimination laws, it would also have to be paid to all men of a similar age.

Grannyhall29 My brother in law was 65 in Feb 2019 and collected his state pension from that date
I was 65 this November and will collect mine November 2020
Just saying.........

It isn't £100 per week for all affected women. I was born November 1959 and will receive total £2100 over 5 years. I agree men and women should have equal retirement age. The inequality was that women of this generation were not paid equally, tended to work part time more because no tax relief or funded child care and no flexible working. Part time workers were excluded from most company pension schemes for many of these years.

It's only right that recompense is made. Women received little or no notice of the changes so were unable to properly plan for the future and the coalition ruling only exacerbated the situation. Women already suffer from a gender pay gap now we also have a gender pension gap. This is not equality!

I had to wait an extra five years for my pension and despite having worked after my children went to school I don’t get the full amount - I get about £130 and I feel very strongly about the loss of my pension for almost 5 years. It has had a dramatic effect on my circumstances. I would love to believe that something could be done to help women like me.

Done.

My sister is 16 months older and retired at 60, whereas I retired at 65. That's quite a big difference. I resented doing the extra five years. She was looking forward to doing 'retired' stuff together, but had to wait!

Done.

There is always going to be a 'cut off' point' regardless. Some people 'escape' and some people get 'caught'. I am '6 years 'lost' pension. Swings and roundabouts.

Ok. I was affected by this change. I should have received my state pension at 60. I will not receive it until 66. My contract with the government was to work until 60 and pay full contributions to qualify for a full pension. I did this.
There were two major changes made. At no time did I EVER receive any formal notification of these changes. I have every bit of paper I have ever received, so I know I was not officially informed.
Even if I had been informed, there would not have been time to make up the six years loss of pension. It would have been impossible in the time scale to invest into an insurance or savings scheme to make up six years shortfall.
The shameful and unforgivable aspects are that we were not notified and even if we had been, there was not enough time to do something useful to mitigate it.
The government did not and do not care.
The Labour Party are so desperate for votes, they have latched on to a scheme (at the very last minute). However, even this policy could not convince me that their party is currently capable of running the country and making the huge decisions that await.
PS.. WASPI has nothing to do with changes in men’s pensions or pensions in general- it’s purely about a demographic of women who were adversely affected by policy changes. At the times, they were considered collateral damage and their issues dismissed.
PPS.. I worked for a government department and I didn’t know how the changes were going to affect me until it was far far too late to do anything in mitigation.

There's usually an upside to swings and roundabouts though, love0c. I know some assume we'll be better off in the long run because we fall into the "new" improved state pension instead of the "old" one. But changes to the rules mean that any of us who were opted out probably won't be.

The changes were too fast, and too sudden. Nobody should have had their pension age moved on by a full 6 years at such short notice, and it's caused inequality amongst women, as Hetty58's post shows. Other countries have managed equalisation better, so that nobody has had more than 18 months or so added. Hardly anyone would have objected to that.

I agree with many on this post, I did not receive notification that i would not be able to retire with a state pension at 60. It was only because i did a pension forcast that i found out how much i would receive and at what age. Obviously i heard through media about it but i NEVER received an official letter telling me or warning me of the changes.

I too am affected by this.
I received only one letter, notifying me of changes. It was only when I checked my pension forecast, I found out that the goalposts had been changed.
Having being forced to retire from teaching on ill health grounds just short of sixty, my only income is my teacher's pension, which doesn't amount to much, as I was a Stay at home mum and returned to teaching only when my children were of secondary school age.
I never intended to stop working at sixty, as I loved my job and knew I would need to work until I reached pensionable age, but some of us have been denied that opportunity to keep on working.
I will need to wait another two years to receive my state pension and we rely on DH's income to pay the bills.

yep DotMH1901 ....Was Born April 54, State retirement Sept 2019 so an extra 5 years 5 months and not even the full amount due to contracting out and then back in. All very complicated but worked FT since 17 and now still working, self employed, for extra pennies due in part to the financial crash in 2008. And I need to work while I am able to.
Lorraine1602 ...During their last term in office, Gordon Brown raided millions from private pension funds instantly devaluing them; he sold Britains gold reserves for a pittance and then at the end of their term, left a note NO MORE MONEY IN THE COFFERS. Folk have short memories....So the country has suffered years of austerity as a result of Labours mismanagement & the financial crash and then no monetary cushion as the gold prices rose
As previously said....wouldn't trust Labour with the money to buy cinema tickets! They are profligate, racist, marxists and will drive businesses into the ground.

Why is the age range 60-75? Do those of us marginally older not have a brain?

Agree that men's pension age should have come down rather than women's going up! I've just turned 60 and I'm worn out,physically and psychologically....More than 40 years working as a nurse and I have scoliosis but am not "ill" enough to get disability allowance.
Just soldier on for another six years (likely more) through the pain doing 12-13 hour shifts and being stressed out of my nut?

I lost out big time. If any of you believe that a Labour govt would:
1. Keep their promise
and
2. Not tax the rest of the population to within an inch of it's life to pay for for it?

Done

My husband is much older than me and I took early retirement when he retired, not knowing that I would have to wait six years longer than expected to receive my pension. Every time I checked my pension entitlement the information said "at retirement age" without giving any indication as to what my retirement age was; naturally, not knowing any different, I assumed it was age 60.

At the time I retired I had worked enough years for a full pension but this has also been changed and now I am 5 years short, due to spending a lot of time working part-time so I could care for my children. Every time I started or stopped work I lost that year's qualification because I didn't pay enough NI for the year to qualify for pension - but the year also doesn't qualify for a childcare credit because I worked for some of the time.

I can't go back to work to get the extra 5 years as my elderly mother lives alone and 120 miles away from me so I spend half my time with her - she doesn't want to move and I have family near me so I don't want to move either. All the travelling costs me a lot of money so having my pension now would be a big help, as would having a bus pass, but I have to wait another 3 years to get both of these.

I prepared our divorce papers and stated that I would no longer take half my ex-husband's government pension if I remarried. I felt it would not be right. I did remarry, a man on government benefits and my share of my husband's pension stopped. I would never have done that had I realised I would have to wait five years to get my pension. I was born in June 1954 and have missed the cut off date by two months. I am working full time now.

I was born in 1957, so will have to wait until I am 67 to get my pension. I don't understand why the government wants to keep older people working longer, rather than being able to retire and thereby free up jobs for younger people.

I was not affected (too old!) by this ruling but it does seem unfair.

The only problem I have with it is: was or was there not ample warning given to all those who would be affected?

I have read both sides and just do not know which is honest and correct.

If little warning was given I would be hopping mad!