Sign the Petition for Womens state pension age going up unfair

jamesd

Pollycat wrote: »

Has there ever been any suggestion that women affected by the 1995 Act were individually informed?

Quite a few were but it's largely moot to injustice claims because mass communication by things like newspapers and news TV is the normal notification method for such long term changes and there was very widespread coverage of the changes both at the time and again during the several years when the Turner Pensions Commission was working and producing its three reports.

Of course it's also worth noting that at least one woman gave evidence to Parliament in which she first wrote that she had received a notice in a state pension forecast which she had requested then asserted that she hadn't received a personal notification.

slightlymiffed

mgdavid wrote: »

Isn't that called trolling?
Maybe it says more about you than us.

No David - it's call outing the trolls who have been aggressively attacking 1950's women on Twitter.

Of course you're not one though, are you?

Pollycat

slightlymiffed wrote: »

I 'bothered to find out' in 2004 (10 years before I reached 60) and not in 2012 (when I received my first unsolicited notification from DWP).

Repeat - I said 'I was 58 when I was informed about the implications of the 1995 Act in Febuary 2012'. Informed officially - and not in response to a request. I made the point that it was because my pension was on my radar that I knew before DWP had me on their radar to inform me.

WOW! Talk about splitting hairs!
You certainly like to put spin on a situation, don't you? :rotfl:
Isn't there a job in Government for you?
You knew in 2004 that your state pension age was changing but weren't officially advised until 2012?
Lordy! Lordy!
Talk about needing to be nannied.

slightlymiffed wrote: »

Actually, because everyone's new state pension age will differ, I believe it was the government's duty to personally inform everyone of their specific retirement date. After all, HMRC seemed to have a duty to ask me if I wanted to buy NI contributions (which I did) so they had detailed knowledge.

It really doesn't matter what you believe should have happened.

slightlymiffed wrote: »

Feather-brained fools probably don't even have filing cabinets do they? Surely they chuck everything in the bin and 'breeze through life not thinking'?

I really have no idea what feather-brained fools do with their paperwork.
And I have no idea why you keep trotting out the phrase 'feather-brained'.
Has someone referred to you thus?

slightlymiffed wrote: »

Enough of this - you know exactly what I'm saying and choose to misinterpret. I've work to do. No pension for me yet.

Do I know exactly what you're saying?
As far as I can see we're in a similar situation but from your posts we have totally different opiniuons about this.
No penson for me either so what's your point?

slightlymiffed wrote: »

No David - it's call outing the trolls who have been aggressively attacking 1950's women on Twitter.

Of course you're not one though, are you?

FTR, I don't post on Twitter.

jem16

slightlymiffed wrote: »

Apologies for wrongly assuming you to work in the financial sector - I cannot conceive how anyone not employed in that field could possibly be interested in women's state pensions.

I cannot conceive how you would not be interested. You're obviously interested now so what changed? Presumably the fact that you now want your pension whereas 21 years ago it was too far away for you to be interested.

I knew all about the rise way back in 1995. I was a Primary teacher working full time with two young children. I was only 39 at the time but as it obviously affected me I took an interest and checked.

I am not saying that I didn't know that state pension age was changing - I did - but I did not know what my own new state pension age would be until I asked DWP.

As there is no personal notification about any UK law change, that's the way most people would find out anything. If you're seriously interested in providing a secure financial future for yourself, why would you not ask the DWP for a forecast?

Unlike you it would seem, I care about all the women affected by these changes - not just myself.

I do care about those who have ended up in serious financial difficulties over these changes and I do hope that something can be done to help them. However I do not agree that this help should be given to EVERY 1950s woman regardless of financial circumstances.

I have no sympathy with many who simply want their pension or compensation from age 60 simply because they feel they are entitled to it, yet they have taken no notice of what has been going on for the last 21 years. We are 6 years through an Act which took 15 years to even begin. The 2011 Act is a different thing and left some women and men with less notice than should have happened. This really only applies to 1953 to 1956 born though. My new state pension date was already 2021 after the 1995 Act so when the 2011 Act came along and changed it to 2022, I was only short of 10 years' notice by a few months. Two friends born in 1953 and 1954 weren't so lucky though but they're not in such a great need as others as they have good occupational pensions already in payment.

So for those that need the help, I'm all for it but that has to be means tested and it seems that WASPI has not desire for that, probably as most would get nothing.

For those born 1953 to 1956 again I'd like to see some help but again not everyone in that age group needs it.

For those that simply want their pension and especially those that want it from 60 or compensation for what they've "lost" I have no sympathy at all.

Pollycat

jem16 wrote: »

I do care about those who have ended up in serious financial difficulties over these changes and I do hope that something can be done to help them. However I do not agree that this help should be given to EVERY 1950s woman regardless of financial circumstances.

And that, Jem, is the difference between a lot of women in my & your situation posting on this thread and the WASPI women & their supporters.

saver861

slightlymiffed wrote: »

This 'fool' has a filing cabinet with a dedicated 'pensions' file - in which is every piece of correspondence from HMRC/DWP. My first unsolicited notification about my state pension age was in 2012. Previous correspondence was at my request.

The problem is this does not fit in with the narrative of many on here. Several wish to thump their chest about how they were informed, up to date, prepared etc. So, the brush approach then is applied to all others who have a different opinion.

The written word can be misinterpreted and that's just a natural obstacle of the ambiguity of the written language. On the other hand, there are those who will seek to escalate their positions on this fact, while ignoring the etiquette of the online communication.

Case in point:

saver861 wrote: »

Unfortunately, as has been said many times, there was no case prior to WASPI bringing it to the forefront. Lots now saying the 2011 changes unfair etc. which is true, but what were they doing about it prior to WASPI? Zilch is the answer to that one.

jamesd wrote: »

Your assertions were that there was no case prior to WASPI and that those who wanted change were doing nothing about it. In fact what happened is that those who wanted change got some in the 2011 act between it being introduced and it becoming law while WASPI has achieved little but noise.

My 'assertion' was that there was no intervention on the 2011 changes as it stands. We all know the original notice was 24 months reduced to 18 months and I have stated many times that was nothing but a bargaining technique. There has been no campaign or any other attempts of significance to have these changes reduced further. If all those who are now stating that the 2011 changes as it stands are unfair then this problem would have been resolved before now, one way or the other.

saver861 wrote: »

Sure ... thats true. However, how does it then be fair that some women had less than 10 years notice and had the longest extension to their pension age, i.e. 18 months.

jamesd wrote: »

Your assertion was that the state pension delay was the longest extension. It wasn't, the longest recent extension was the five year increase in pension age for men and women who hadn't reached age 50 yet.

Once again, I'm clear on my statement referring to the 18 months extension for some which many take to be unfair. JamesD likes to show that this is not factually correct and that actually there has been a longer extension to a different pension scheme.

JamesD is an experienced forum user and I'm assuming is aware of the etiquette etc. I'm happy to debate points with any forumite but if you are just going to extrapolate loosely related facts to contradict points being discussed then, no doubt, you will excuse me from replying. If such 'corrections' make you feel better then enjoy!

saver861

mgdavid wrote: »

Isn't that called trolling?
Maybe it says more about you than us.

Just out of interest - who is the 'us'??????????

Do explain ...

jem16

saver861 wrote: »

My 'assertion' was that there was no intervention on the 2011 changes as it stands. We all know the original notice was 24 months reduced to 18 months and I have stated many times that was nothing but a bargaining technique.

Just because you have stated it many times doesn't make it true. If there had been no campaign at the time, there would have been no reduction.

There has been no campaign or any other attempts of significance to have these changes reduced further.

The campaign that started in 2010 is still ongoing. It is quite correct that nothing further has been achieved by this campaign but that doesn't mean it's not trying.

At least they achieved something.

missbiggles1

slightlymiffed wrote: »

No David - it's call outing the trolls who have been aggressively attacking 1950's women on Twitter.

Of course you're not one though, are you?

But you haven't outed anybody on here as far as I can see.

In fact, you're the one who's been attacking "50s women" on here simply because they disagree with your opinion and attitude.

missbiggles1

Pollycat wrote: »

WOW! Talk about splitting hairs!
You certainly like to put spin on a situation, don't you? :rotfl:
Isn't there a job in Government for you?
You knew in 2004 that your state pension age was changing but weren't officially advised until 2012?
Lordy! Lordy!
Talk about needing to be nannied.

It really doesn't matter what you believe should have happened.


I really have no idea what feather-brained fools do with their paperwork.
And I have no idea why you keep trotting out the phrase 'feather-brained'.
Has someone referred to you thus?

Do I know exactly what you're saying?
As far as I can see we're in a similar situation but from your posts we have totally different opiniuons about this.
No penson for me either so what's your point?

FTR, I don't post on Twitter.

That'd be me.:D