Back to 60's Judicial Review Outcome

Pollycat

Hopeless123 wrote: »

But I got a personal letter in 2013, (and then another in 2014), always easily contactable via tax details and NI

OK.
So when do you think your cut off date should be when you were 'aware' of the change?

Hopeless123 wrote: »

There has to be a cut off point somewhere and that cut off should be the point that people became aware, i.e. were told officially, that they'd need to plan differently. I genuinely don't know and can't work out when that should be and would be severely !!!!!! off if I was born in Jan 1960. I'm not saying any of it is perfect, obviously.

Becoming 'aware' doesn't mean having to be told officially.

Hopeless123

Pollycat wrote: »

OK.
So when do you think your cut off date should be?

Exactly what I said, I've no idea when people started to be informed

Silvertabby

“ OK.
So when do you think your cut off date should be?
Originally posted by Pollycat

Hopeless123 wrote: »

Exactly what I said, I've no idea when people started to be informed

1993 budget, then widely advertised in the media from 1995. As I've said before on these boards, my late mum was terminally ill and housebound for several months before her death in 1995 - yet she knew about the changes.

hyubh

LHW99 wrote: »

If there is a group that may need compensation, IMO it is those who will lose out on GMP indexing due to the introduction of the NSP.
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-7676597/Why-Guaranteed-Minimum-Pension-not-rising-line-inflation.html

Although, that article doesn't make clear the revaluation rate, which is pretty crucial to determining whether the correspondent has lost out or not due to nSP, especially given the GMP is pre-88 only (i.e. from contracting out many years ago). If fixed, it would have been a very, very long time before her COD had reduced enough to get increases effectively through her state pension.

On the flip side, assuming the revaluation method isn't fixed, then the correspondent will have lost out anyway due to the rise in her SPA, given the age at which the GMP stops revaluing and (being pre-88) doesn't increase remains at 60. So, between 60 and SPA, the effective increases on her GMP will have been zero anyway - nSP just broadens the effect from 60 to death. Equalisation of the state pension age also affects the technicalities of equalising GMP for sex differences (inherent to the GMP itself, given its interconnection with the old state pension system), which private sector schemes are having to look at now.

(Shorter me: it's tricky to have radically different views on GMP post-16 and equalisation of the state pension age, since the two issues fundamentally overlap.)

Hopeless123

Silvertabby wrote: »

1993 budget, then widely advertised in the media from 1995. As I've said before on these boards, my late mum was terminally ill and housebound for several months before her death in 1995 - yet she knew about the changes.

Well, I didn't know. Really I didn't, I'm not making it up, I never had any idea and therefore had no reason to check.

Pollycat

Hopeless123 wrote: »

Exactly what I said, I've no idea when people started to be informed

I'm talking about you specifically.

You knew i.e. were told officially in 2013.
How far away was your original state pension age (and I mean based on the 1995 Act, not age 60) when you became aware of the change and what was your revised state pension age based on the 2011 Act?
My original state pension age was 63 years and 6 months.
The 2011 act deferred it to 64 years and 9 months.
I received a letter in January 2012 telling me about the deferment.
That was 5 years and 3 months notice.

[Deleted User]

Labour has promised compensation to more than three million women who lost out on years of state pension payments when their retirement age was raised, if it wins the general election.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-pension-age-women-waspi-general-election-latest-a9215451.html

Silvertabby

“ 1993 budget, then widely advertised in the media from 1995. As I've said before on these boards, my late mum was terminally ill and housebound for several months before her death in 1995 - yet she knew about the changes.
Originally posted by Silvertabby

Hopeless123 wrote: »

Well, I didn't know. Really I didn't, I'm not making it up, I never had any idea and therefore had no reason to check.

My mum didn't read the 'posh' papers - just tabloids and women's magazines. The matter was also discussed/moaned about at length with her women friend visitors who had daughters.

I'm sure you are genuine when you say that you didn't know, but is it at all possible that you did hear about the changes but dismissed them on the grounds that 'this is only applies to pensioners - not 40 year old me'?

hyubh

Silvertabby wrote: »

This last minute 'bung' (note it isn't in the manifesto) smacks of desperation on the part of Labour.

Leaving aside the (very circular) WASPI/BT60 debate, indeed - they are giving off the impression of panicking a bit when the manifesto didn't make much of a splash, and the first leaders' debate was a low-key 50/50 affair.

jem16

Silvertabby wrote: »

And note the 'taper' for women born from 1955 onwards. What's the betting that women born in 1959 would only get a few hundreds of £s, if that. Be interesting to see what the grabbing WASPEs make of all this.

Those born April 55 onwards are not happy at all. It's all "I don't get as much" comments.

Her reply? She had been told by WASPE that she must state that she had never been informed of the changes, in order to get her payout.

That does not surprise me. I've seen comments on Waspi FB site saying this too.