WASPI Campaign .... State Pensions
Options
Comments
-
No surprise there but some women do. The effect of me assuming that long out of the workforce as to increase the monthly amount needed, as you saw with the much lower later number when I didn't reduce the working life.Really, as a woman born in 1953 I can't think of a single woman who was out of the workforce for 18 years. Personally I have 4 children, started work at 15 and worked fulltime until I was 58 when I started to reduce my hours.
No. That it just doesn't take that much money out of what someone making prudent retirement plans could have been putting aside anyway, even on a low wage.Are you saying we should have started planning for the 18 months long before anyone knew it was going to happen?
Yes, I know about tight money - I grew up mostly in what was effectively a single parent family of mother and four kids, with very limited money.I was a carer for my husband and working fulltime and money was tight so I didn't start preparing then
That £10-15 was in today's money. Back when you were 15 in 1968 a Pound then is worth around £15.60 today after increasing it with RPI each year until now. Though I still don't really expect a fifteen year old to be paying in that much.If you are saying I should have been saving at net about of £10 to £15 per month can I just point out that when I started work I was earning £28 per month so £15 would have been very significant
If it helps, I'm in line for three or quite possibly more increases in state pension age and a much shorter notice increase from 50 to 55 for when I could have taken my personal pensions.I put alot of thought into preparing for my retirement but two increases was a bit much, one fair enough but not enough time for the second.0 -
slightlymiffed wrote: »Agreed I do remember Ros Altmann saying she was sent abusive tweets but did not see any myself. I wondering if the Telegraph had sight of any of these? 'Being struck down with cancer' sounds to me to be very extreme and suggests trolling of the worst kind.
But...there is absolutely no excuse for any kind of vile abuse of the Baroness and women need to remember she may yet be able to help the Waspi campaign far better from the outside now?
There have been many horribly vile Facebook and Twitter comments about and to Ros Altmann from WASPI supporters. Here's just one example
0 -
I've recently found out that a number of LGPS members also received a state pension forecast from the DWP which included accurate information on their new state pension age after the 1995 Act. This was also the case for the Civil Service scheme members who had to opt out of receiving a combined statement - I would guess that most didn't opt out. The Teachers' Pension Scheme informed all members of both 1995 and 2011 increases although didn't contain an actual state pension statement. As many 1950s women were local council workers, teachers and civil servants I would hazard a guess that many did actually know. I would probably also hazard a guess that if these 3 PS schemes did this, them probably all did.
That's an amazing revelation, thank you jem16! There were similar actions in the private sector - for example, the annual pension statement issued by my employer (a large plc) did mention that the State Pension age is changing and recommended to obtain a forecast via a DSS/DWP phone number or a DSS/DWP URL. Although me and my colleagues knew anyway as we were often discussing our options for early retirement.
Add these public and private sector activities to the 16 million unprompted Automatic Pension Forecasts that were sent out by the DWP between 2004 and 2006, as well as all the other information that was available prior to 2011, and the WASPI claim that 2.6 million women were never told anything appears simply not credible. Also, if the state pension is critically important for someone, it doesn't sound convincing that they would never have looked into how much they would be receiving in a few years time. As soon as they would have asked that question, they would have also been given the date from which they could draw state pension.
It will not be possible to conclusively prove who knew when, but it is clear that the WASPI women, especially if they were teachers or public sector workers or worked for larger companies, will never be able to prove that they were not given the information about the 1995 change years ago.
0 -
It will not be possible to conclusively prove who knew when, but it is clear that the WASPI women, especially if they were teachers or public sector workers or worked for larger companies, will never be able to prove that they were not given the information about the 1995 change years ago.
If WASPI had campaigned against the 2011 Act, they might have achieved something. Instead they stuck their heads where the sun don't shine hoping for a miracle.What a wasted effort!0 -
slightlymiffed wrote: »I did include a link Pollycat so I can only quote as per article.
Agree - it does sound odd but my point is that we have been told that we were somehow negligent in not keeping abreast of changes to state pension age back in the late 1990's and yet we're now in July 2016 and still the misinformation continues...and, from what should be a really reliable source.
Just proves that relying on 'the media' for accuracy in pensions policy may not always be advisable?
No. It is your comprehension that is incorrect. Do not confuse Retirement age (i.e. stopping working) with SPA.
Many people, women included, do retire some years before SPA. That is because they keep themselves well-informed and plan their finances so they are able to.The questions that get the best answers are the questions that give most detail....0 -
slightlymiffed wrote: ».........
You've got me foxed here... how do you defer a state pension of £8,000? Surely, after April 6th this year, there is no 'deferral'?
Goodness, you really are arguing from a position of ignorance aren't you.The questions that get the best answers are the questions that give most detail....0 -
I linked to your post so it was fairly easy to see what you wrote: "having read it" in reference to the House of Commons Library document CBP-07405 Increases in the State Pension age for women born in the 1950s.. That contained the text I quoted: "Letters to women with a State Pension age determined by the 1995 timetable (born between 6th April 1950 and 5th April 1953) were sent between April 2009 and March 2011".
From the House of commons library document, which itself sourced it from the official government response to the WASPI petition.
Those notifications were sent on a different timetable than the 1995 ones to those born up to 5 April 1953 that I quoted.
There are at least three points:
1. You made the claim in the post I was responding to: "back in 2011, many/most women were still unaware that their pension age had been changed by the previous Pensions Act 1995". As you have seen, the official government statement is that "Letters to women with a State Pension age determined by the 1995 timetable (born between 6th April 1950 and 5th April 1953) were sent between April 2009 and March 2011" in both the document that you appeared to have written that you wrote and in the response to the WASPI petition that you would presumably have read. Your claim that "most" women didn't know after personal letters had been sent to all affected by the 1995 change using the last address known by HMRC is clearly false and it seems most likely that "many" is also false.
2. Whether you knowingly made a false statement. We've seen that you appear to have claimed to read the library document and presumably read the response to the WASPI petition before your post making the man/most claim. Personally if you did read those I prefer to believe that you just forgot. But in that case the natural thing to do is recant and correct the post.
3. Or alternatively, whether you were asserting that women who have been sent and presumably received those personal notifications would still not have known about the changes. One of the key WASPI claims is that people weren't sent personal notifications. If you assert that most were unaware even after getting such letters, you appear to be asserting that personal notification made little difference.
I don't like your tone here.
'False statement'? - no, I did read it - I thought you said I wrote it. Your posts are so tedious, and your continual regurgitation of research briefings, it is any wonder.
No - it is you who is wrong - most 1950's women (in other words,born 1950 -1959) were not born between 1950 and 1953 and so they did not start to be informed until 2012 - which is 14 years after the 1995 Pensions Act and after the Pensions Act 2011. Failure by DWP.0 -
Yes, it's crystal clear. Women expect to retire two years before they get their state pensions. Which is no surprise, rather, it's routine to retire before state pension age and has been for a long time.
As the 2004 First Report of the Turner Pensions Commission noted: "While people sometimes talk of 60 or 65 as being the retirement age, in fact only 53% of women remain in employment by age 59 and only 42% of men are employed at age 64 [Figure 2.7]".
I assume that you simply didn't know about the usual difference between when people retire and when they reach state pension age so didn't recognise that the text you quoted was just reporting life as usual.
Wrong again.
Re-read my post - it is you who is referring to the 'age 63' comment, not me. I had even underlined it to help you.
“Over the next four years women’s state pension age will be increased to 65. With this in mind, they’ll need to fund an additional two years of retirement from an inadequate pension pot before the state pension kicks in, unless other income, such as their partner’s salary or retirement savings is available.”
Women's state pension age will be increased to 66 and not 65 in the next four years. Fact.0 -
There have been many horribly vile Facebook and Twitter comments about and to Ros Altmann from WASPI supporters. Here's just one example
That comment is repulsive and totally unacceptable, I agree.
I'm not defending anyone guilty of trolling or using vile slurs and innuendo but I think you will find one such person in that conversation is guilty of a prolonged and aggressive campaign of vile attacks on Waspi women and he too should be deeply ashamed.0 -
mystic_trev wrote: »If WASPI had campaigned against the 2011 Act, they might have achieved something. Instead they stuck their heads where the sun don't shine hoping for a miracle.What a wasted effort!
As usual, a pointless comment.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 248K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards