Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Faye
    • By MSE Faye 7th Mar 17, 5:23 PM
    • 146Posts
    • 55Thanks
    MSE Faye
    Women fighting state pension changes to protest outside Parliament on Budget Day
    • #1
    • 7th Mar 17, 5:23 PM
    Women fighting state pension changes to protest outside Parliament on Budget Day 7th Mar 17 at 5:23 PM
    WASPI campaigners will be joined by supportive MPs and trade unionists in a bid to force a Government compromise...
    Read the full story:
    'Women fighting state pension changes to protest outside Parliament on Budget Day'

    Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
    See the latest news from MoneySavingExpertNews
    Follow the MSE on Twitter: @MoneySavingExp
    Get Martin's Money Tips
    Join the MSE Forum
Page 5
    • POPPYOSCAR
    • By POPPYOSCAR 9th Mar 17, 5:32 PM
    • 10,502 Posts
    • 21,707 Thanks
    POPPYOSCAR
    Hang on, WASPI appear to be saying that if they don't get what they want they'll resort to violence or other illegal action. (How else do you interpret all available legal and other options?) And this is in a letter issued via a solicitor.

    If I find myself accused of murder and my only options are to represent myself or accept a legal aid solicitor who happens to be from Bindman's, I'll be representing myself. I'll probably end up in prison for life but there's no way I could do worse than a legal firm who while speaking for its clients threatens to break the law in a letter addressed to the Government.
    Originally posted by Malthusian


    Where have they said violence? Or is this your own extreme interpretation?
    • Acquinas
    • By Acquinas 9th Mar 17, 5:40 PM
    • 113 Posts
    • 76 Thanks
    Acquinas
    This is all a bit one sided.

    We surely don't expect people to act contrary to their own self-interest. The self-employed lobby are today complaining that NI is going up for them. In terms of policy there are arguments both ways (greater tax take + equalisation vs discouraging enterprise), and the usual suspects are behind them, but the same could be said for the harmonisation of pension ages. There are plenty on this forum who put forward arguments and wheezes to maximise benefits and minimise tax liability but they don't get monstered for acting contrary to the interests of society as a whole by not fully paying their dues. Gender equality supports the notion of harmonisation and should, in the round, mean less of a drain on the public purse. But on the other hand more women are in lower paid jobs and it could be said that the state has a duty to step in earlier for them rather than allow them to work themselves into an early grave in menial work.

    I'm sure that many of the male posters will have spouses, partners, sisters etc who will be caught by this. I, for one, would be more than happy for my OH to bow out at 60 and allow me to fight the good fight.

    Discuss.
    • colsten
    • By colsten 9th Mar 17, 6:06 PM
    • 8,717 Posts
    • 7,370 Thanks
    colsten

    They have a large campaign to raise cash for a legal challenge.
    Originally posted by uk1
    They'd need several hundreds of thousands before any Court could even take their case, as to begin with, they would have to demonstrate that they could pay the costs of the other party if they lost. I believe the Article 50 challenge crowdfund spent well in excess of half a million. WASPI are light years from having this sort of money for a legal challenge, not to talk about actually having a legal claim for anything.

    You can't simply rock up in a Court of Law, say you are not taking a legal action, and demand that you should be paid public monies that you are not entitled to by law. Do you see the contradiction? People cannot claim that a law is illegal - particularly not if the laws have been in force for over 5, or even 21, years. I believe someone h
    as unsuccessfully tried to challenge the 1995 Act in the European Court of Human Rights already, for 'violation of human rights'.
    • custardy
    • By custardy 9th Mar 17, 6:07 PM
    • 32,388 Posts
    • 27,152 Thanks
    custardy
    This is all a bit one sided.

    We surely don't expect people to act contrary to their own self-interest. The self-employed lobby are today complaining that NI is going up for them. In terms of policy there are arguments both ways (greater tax take + equalisation vs discouraging enterprise), and the usual suspects are behind them, but the same could be said for the harmonisation of pension ages. There are plenty on this forum who put forward arguments and wheezes to maximise benefits and minimise tax liability but they don't get monstered for acting contrary to the interests of society as a whole by not fully paying their dues. Gender equality supports the notion of harmonisation and should, in the round, mean less of a drain on the public purse. But on the other hand more women are in lower paid jobs and it could be said that the state has a duty to step in earlier for them rather than allow them to work themselves into an early grave in menial work.

    I'm sure that many of the male posters will have spouses, partners, sisters etc who will be caught by this. I, for one, would be more than happy for my OH to bow out at 60 and allow me to fight the good fight.

    Discuss.
    Originally posted by Acquinas
    Fine for men in menial work and those women coming in behind, I assume?
    • uk1
    • By uk1 9th Mar 17, 6:11 PM
    • 994 Posts
    • 642 Thanks
    uk1
    They'd need several hundreds of thousands before any Court could even take their case, as to begin with, they would have to demonstrate that they could pay the costs of the other party if they lost. I believe the Article 50 challenge crowdfund spent well in excess of half a million. WASPI are light years from having this sort of money for a legal challenge, not to talk about actually having a legal claim for anything.

    You can't simply rock up in a Court of Law, say you are not taking a legal action, and demand that you should be paid public monies that you are not entitled to by law. Do you see the contradiction? People cannot claim that a law is illegal - particularly not if the laws have been in force for over 5, or even 21, years. I believe someone h
    as unsuccessfully tried to challenge the 1995 Act in the European Court of Human Rights already, for 'violation of human rights'.
    Originally posted by colsten
    I'm sorry, but you seem to be making up your own twilight world here.

    You do not need to prove you have the cash to bring an action before you start it.
    • colsten
    • By colsten 9th Mar 17, 6:13 PM
    • 8,717 Posts
    • 7,370 Thanks
    colsten
    Discuss.
    Originally posted by Acquinas
    Assuming you are aware of the cost of the WASPI demands to the taxpayer, and of the failure of any political party to date to come forward with a credible proposal for how the financial demands of those women could be met. Assuming also you are aware that most of the 1950s women are not in financial hardship.

    Discuss.
    • colsten
    • By colsten 9th Mar 17, 6:14 PM
    • 8,717 Posts
    • 7,370 Thanks
    colsten

    You do not need to prove you have the cash to bring an action before you start it.
    Originally posted by uk1
    You do.

    characters
    characters
    • uk1
    • By uk1 9th Mar 17, 6:17 PM
    • 994 Posts
    • 642 Thanks
    uk1
    You do.

    characters
    characters
    Originally posted by colsten
    Repeating the same nonsense doesn't correct it.

    Anyone can bring an action if the do so directly without representation, or with representation if a law company takes the case on. People go bankrupt every day when they lose and are presented with costs they cannot meet.
    • colsten
    • By colsten 9th Mar 17, 6:42 PM
    • 8,717 Posts
    • 7,370 Thanks
    colsten
    Repeating the same nonsense doesn't correct it.
    Originally posted by uk1
    Describing other people's posts as nonsense doesn't make other people's posts nonsense.

    If a Court case is so easy, what's keeping WASPI from taking action? Many of them keep reminding people on social media that they might not live to see their SPA. In the light of this, it's all the more amazing that it's been a year now they have been threatening legal action for, and done nothing of the sort. I for one would love to see them get on with it, and to see them getting cross-examined in a Court of Law.

    Judge to WASPI Director: "You were an HR Director in the 1990s and early 2000s"?
    WASPI Director to Judge: "Yes, Sir"
    Judge to WASPI Director: "Did you know about the 1995 SPA increase"?
    WASPI Director to Judge: "Yes, Sir, I did, Sir"
    Judge to WASPI Director: "Did you inform your employees of the SPA increase"?
    WASPI Director to Judge: "Well, Sir. No, Sir. It wasn't a legal requirement to do so, Sir"
    Judge to WASPI Director: "Did you not think you should have told your employees"?
    WASPI Director to Judge: "No, Sir. Not my job, Sir"
    Judge to WASPI Director: "Are you claiming compensation for yourself, Madam"?
    WASPI Director to Judge: "Yes, Sir"
    Judge to WASPI Director: "On what grounds, Madam"?
    WASPI Director to Judge: "I have been robbed, Sir"


    And so on.
  • jamesd
    But on the other hand more women are in lower paid jobs and it could be said that the state has a duty to step in earlier for them rather than allow them to work themselves into an early grave in menial work.
    Originally posted by Acquinas
    Female life expectancy for those around state pension age is around two years more than for men. If your concern is working to an early grave then you should be encouraging longer female working and earlier male retirement.
    • Pollycat
    • By Pollycat 9th Mar 17, 7:32 PM
    • 17,614 Posts
    • 44,834 Thanks
    Pollycat
    I'm sure that many of the male posters will have spouses, partners, sisters etc who will be caught by this. I, for one, would be more than happy for my OH to bow out at 60 and allow me to fight the good fight.
    Originally posted by Acquinas
    Well, if she's not 60 yet, she's well and truly missed that boat.

    Discuss.
    Originally posted by Acquinas
    The board you're looking for is waaaay down south.
    Here you are:
    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=57
    • Thrugelmir
    • By Thrugelmir 9th Mar 17, 7:44 PM
    • 55,160 Posts
    • 48,356 Thanks
    Thrugelmir

    Discuss.
    Originally posted by Acquinas
    Nothing to discuss. Time to move on.
    “ “Bull markets are born on pessimism, grow on skepticism, mature on optimism, and die on euphoria. The time of maximum pessimism is the best time to buy, and the time of maximum optimism is the best time to sell.” Sir John Marks Templeton
    • Welshdaffodil2
    • By Welshdaffodil2 19th Apr 17, 11:34 AM
    • 1 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Welshdaffodil2
    This subject has gone quiet again. Why was the new womens retirement age of 66 not staggered more gradually ? That would have been fairer for those involved. I have gone from a prospective retirement age of 60 to a retirement age of 66 as I was born in 1954. Is that fair ? Will anyone challenge this again ?
    • molerat
    • By molerat 19th Apr 17, 11:38 AM
    • 16,996 Posts
    • 11,178 Thanks
    molerat
    The post above yours said it all.
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk/donations.html
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 19th Apr 17, 12:00 PM
    • 89,464 Posts
    • 54,933 Thanks
    dunstonh
    This subject has gone quiet again. Why was the new womens retirement age of 66 not staggered more gradually ? That would have been fairer for those involved. I have gone from a prospective retirement age of 60 to a retirement age of 66 as I was born in 1954. Is that fair ? Will anyone challenge this again ?
    Originally posted by Welshdaffodil2
    It was absolutely fair. The increase from 60 to 65 was started consultation nearly 26 years ago and was put in place 22 years ago. So, plenty of time and very fair. Only the stupid and greedy consider that bit unfair.

    The 2011 changes accelerated it and many did consider that to be unfair on certain age groups. The Govt did backtrack on some of those to ensure that no-one had more than 18 months short notice increases.

    At the same time, the increases in the state pension have gone up faster and the qualifying period has gone down. You don't see the greedy women asking for £42k saying they want those things reversed.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Pollycat
    • By Pollycat 19th Apr 17, 1:33 PM
    • 17,614 Posts
    • 44,834 Thanks
    Pollycat
    This subject has gone quiet again. Why was the new womens retirement age of 66 not staggered more gradually ? That would have been fairer for those involved. I have gone from a prospective retirement age of 60 to a retirement age of 66 as I was born in 1954. Is that fair ? Will anyone challenge this again ?
    Originally posted by Welshdaffodil2
    You have never had a retirement age of 60 since 1995.
    You would have been aged 41 then.
    How much more of a gradual stagger do you want?

    It is most definitely fair that men and women born on the same day should receive their state pension on the same day.

    I sincerely hope that nobody will challenge this again.
    • custardy
    • By custardy 19th Apr 17, 2:03 PM
    • 32,388 Posts
    • 27,152 Thanks
    custardy
    You have never had a retirement age of 60 since 1995.
    You would have been aged 41 then.
    How much more of a gradual stagger do you want?

    It is most definitely fair that men and women born on the same day should receive their state pension on the same day.

    I sincerely hope that nobody will challenge this again.
    Originally posted by Pollycat
    Its hilarious the amount of women who see nothing wrong in shorter lived men retiring later.
    • Pollycat
    • By Pollycat 19th Apr 17, 2:08 PM
    • 17,614 Posts
    • 44,834 Thanks
    Pollycat
    Its hilarious the amount of women who see nothing wrong in shorter lived men retiring later.
    Originally posted by custardy
    I think it's quite sad that they are incapable of seeing how unfair it really is.

    Grasping WASPI.
    • Silvertabby
    • By Silvertabby 21st Apr 17, 2:39 PM
    • 1,510 Posts
    • 1,803 Thanks
    Silvertabby
    I see GRASPI are trying to make the payment of the State pension at 60 an election issue. I seem to recall Corbyn saying he 'supports their cause' - I just hope that most women aren't stupid enough to fall for that one!
    • PensionTech
    • By PensionTech 21st Apr 17, 3:14 PM
    • 710 Posts
    • 926 Thanks
    PensionTech
    This subject has gone quiet again. Why was the new womens retirement age of 66 not staggered more gradually ? That would have been fairer for those involved. I have gone from a prospective retirement age of 60 to a retirement age of 66 as I was born in 1954. Is that fair ? Will anyone challenge this again ?
    I've gone from a prospective retirement age of 60 to a retirement age of at least 68 as I was born in 1988...

    As for "why wasn't it more gradual", you will be happy to know that you don't have to do any research into this whatsoever, because I've done it all for you! Check this out and then tell me it wasn't gradual.
    I am a Technical Analyst at a third-party pension administration company. My job is to interpret rules and legislation and provide technical guidance, but I am not a lawyer or a qualified advisor of any kind and anything I say on these boards is my opinion only.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,337Posts Today

7,310Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Shana tova umetuka - a sweet Jewish New Year to all celebrating. I won't be online the rest of t'week, as I take the time to be with family

  • Dear Steve. Please note doing a poll to ask people's opinion does not in itself imply an opinion! https://t.co/UGvWlMURxy

  • Luciana is on the advisory board of @mmhpi (we have MPs from most parties) https://t.co/n99NAxGAAQ

  • Follow Martin