Times article claim that Waspi women are tone deaf and should read the room

Doodledog I found out through my elder sister of 5 years, she got the 62, I got the 66. Still worked until 69, just deferred SP.

I was not sent a letter, email or any comms. Extra would be nice but I’d rather it go to low income youngsters 🤗

eazybee

The information was out and about for a long time, but I am realising with some of my friends and acquaintances that they never pick up a newspaper, rarely watch or listen to TV/radio news or take any interest in current affairs. Someone asked me the other day what' all the political stuff was on the television;' (it was Starmer delivering his make or break speech) and when I explained she said, oh I never listen to that sort of thing. She doesn't read emails either.
I find it astonishing.

For something as crucial as this move on women’s pensions individual letters should have been sent out to each and every women affected. We are not talking about a year or so, this was SIX years in one fail swoop, without adequate notice to make arrangements to pay in more and be to still retire at 60, then bigger me, they out it up to 67 for many of us.

In addition those of us who did stay on in full time work after 60, were still clobbered with NI payments, which those woman eligible for retirement at 50, but who chose to continue working, did not have to stay, in some cases there would be been only a year or so between the ages of said women!

I agree with young man too. I didn't used to keep up with current affairs but I knew this change was coming, it was widely covered.
I just miss out on being WASPI, but I still had to work 7 years longer than I was anticipating to get my pension.
Might feel a bit differently if I had a hope of £££ because of that, but I do agree pension age for men & women should be the same.

The information was out and about for a long time, but I am realising with some of my friends and acquaintances that they never pick up a newspaper, rarely watch or listen to TV/radio news or take any interest in current affairs. Someone asked me the other day what' all the political stuff was on the television;' (it was Starmer delivering his make or break speech) and when I explained she said, oh I never listen to that sort of thing. She doesn't read emails either.
I find it astonishing.

Graphite

This has all been argued over many many times and explained many many times.

I suspect that many claiming the information was “out there” have not bothered to read the PHSO reports. Nor are they aware of the surveys that were done in 2003/4 and 2007 that showed just how many women didn’t know what their new State Pension age was.

Otherwise, the PHSO would not have concluded after a six year investigation that there was maladministration and setting out a chart for compensation.

I was in the cohort of women who were never going to be told personally what their new SP age was - those born after May 1955.

What I do have is a letter from the Pension Service (part of DWP) dated 2007 with accompanying leaflet categorically telling me that I will be able to claim my SP when I am 60. I was then 52.

In other words, twelve years after the 1995 Pensions Act, DWP were still sending out wrong information.

Coincidentally, in 2007, the DWP finally admitted that its information campaign was not working. They knew this is 2003 but did nothing about it.

Extract from PHSO.

115. Unpublished DWP research from 2007 found 85% of women aged 48 to 59 knew State Pension age was going to be equalised, but many women did not know when it would happen. The research also found that 50% of women whose State Pension age had risen to between 60 and 65, and 36% of women whose State Pension age had risen to 65, still thought that it was 60. DWP told us that if people are aware of the changes, they can find out their own State Pension age.

116. An internal DWP memo from April 2007 described the 2007 research findings as ‘depressing reading’. The memo reflects on the lack of progress since 2004 and the prospect of future complaints from women. It states:

‘You floated the idea of contacting the Ombudsman to get a feel for how she would react to claims from women saying they had never been told or were not aware that state pension age is increasing. In the light of the lack of upward movement from our 43% base figure from 3 years ago, we suggest putting this off until we can explain our strategy from here to get the message over. If we go now, we face being painted into a corner. Despite a really strong defensive brief, we still have 50% “ignorance levels” with three years to go. [The Ombudsman’s] first question will be what are you proposing to do about it?’

117. A ministerial submission from December 2007 shows DWP knew people did not understand the impact of the changes for them. It says: ‘One of the key issues is that whilst some women do in fact have an awareness of the impending change, they do not understand how this relates specifically to them’.

When, at the outset women were supposed to be given fifteen years notice of the change, it took the DWP from 1995 to 2009, 14 years to get around telling only some of them.

I don’t expect compensation but I will challenge any women or man who trots out the tired “information out there” argument.

*Ready the PHSO reports and surveys.*

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

I too am in that cohort, 1958, I too did know about the increase, but not informed formally and too late to pay more when it mattered and retire at 60 as planned. I have poor health, and have had since the birth f my son in 2002, and was only able to retire early at the end of 2022 due the death of my mother.

This has all been argued over many many times and explained many many times.

I suspect that many claiming the information was “out there” have not bothered to read the PHSO reports. Nor are they aware of the surveys that were done in 2003/4 and 2007 that showed just how many women didn’t know what their new State Pension age was.

Otherwise, the PHSO would not have concluded after a six year investigation that there was maladministration and setting out a chart for compensation.

I was in the cohort of women who were never going to be told personally what their new SP age was - those born after May 1955.

What I do have is a letter from the Pension Service (part of DWP) dated 2007 with accompanying leaflet categorically telling me that I will be able to claim my SP when I am 60. I was then 52.

In other words, twelve years after the 1995 Pensions Act, DWP were still sending out wrong information.

Coincidentally, in 2007, the DWP finally admitted that its information campaign was not working. They knew this is 2003 but did nothing about it.

Extract from PHSO.

115. Unpublished DWP research from 2007 found 85% of women aged 48 to 59 knew State Pension age was going to be equalised, but many women did not know when it would happen. The research also found that 50% of women whose State Pension age had risen to between 60 and 65, and 36% of women whose State Pension age had risen to 65, still thought that it was 60. DWP told us that if people are aware of the changes, they can find out their own State Pension age.

116. An internal DWP memo from April 2007 described the 2007 research findings as ‘depressing reading’. The memo reflects on the lack of progress since 2004 and the prospect of future complaints from women. It states:

‘You floated the idea of contacting the Ombudsman to get a feel for how she would react to claims from women saying they had never been told or were not aware that state pension age is increasing. In the light of the lack of upward movement from our 43% base figure from 3 years ago, we suggest putting this off until we can explain our strategy from here to get the message over. If we go now, we face being painted into a corner. Despite a really strong defensive brief, we still have 50% “ignorance levels” with three years to go. [The Ombudsman’s] first question will be what are you proposing to do about it?’

117. A ministerial submission from December 2007 shows DWP knew people did not understand the impact of the changes for them. It says: ‘One of the key issues is that whilst some women do in fact have an awareness of the impending change, they do not understand how this relates specifically to them’.

When, at the outset women were supposed to be given fifteen years notice of the change, it took the DWP from 1995 to 2009, 14 years to get around telling only some of them.

I don’t expect compensation but I will challenge any women or man who trots out the tired “information out there” argument.

Ready the PHSO reports and surveys.

Agreed, Molly. I think working age people are fed up with being the ones who have to subsidise everything. The government needs to wise up to that and somehow make it the case that people are always better off in work than not. If they don't, the populists will take advantage of public discontent, and heaven help us all.

Basgetti

Looking at the prospects for our adult children, sorry, I agree with him.
The information was out there 🤷‍♀️

The prospects for our adult children will be heavily affected by the increasing number who can’t or don't work.

eazybee

I agree; the information was there, and I cannot support a demand for payment of extra pension to which people are not entitled.

But how does one become 'entitled' to a pension? Many people get them after hardly paying in at all - are they 'entitled'?

I don't think it is reasonable to take money compulsorily from those who work, on the understanding that they will get a pension at 60, then change the rules when they are 45 or whatever. Not everyone is in a position to make up the difference, and back then there were fewer ways to do so.

I knew of the changes, but was not sent a letter, email or any sort of communication (HMRC confirmed this when I sent a FOI request to ask them). I can't remember how I found out, but I fully accept that many people would not have known. For one thing I don't think the information was 'out there' in the way that information is now, and for another, a lot of people trusted the government to do the right thing, and didn't listen to or read media about financial matters.

Many still don't - on my local FB page there were lots of complaints from people saying they had been denied a vote in the recent elections. They hadn't been, of course - there were no elections in our area, as we had ours last year. Similarly, there was a TV news item last night about a possible change of PM, and a woman trotted out media snippets about Starmer ('flip flop', 'rabbit in the headlights' etc etc) then said she'd never heard of Wes Streeting, but had heard of Westlife. Not everyone is 'tuned in', and governments know this. Communication channels need to take account of different levels of engagement, and they know that, too, but they chose to avoid controversy by keeping 'notifications' to channels where many people would not come across them.

I agree; the information was there, and I cannot support a demand for payment of extra pension to which people are not entitled.

Looking at the prospects for our adult children, sorry, I agree with him.
The information was out there 🤷‍♀️