WASPE "On Brink Of Defeat"

jem16

toomuchinfo said:

I’m a WASPI woman and I support the equalising of pension ages. The difficulty is that it wasn’t communicated adequately. In 1995, I had a full time job, a disabled son and a uncle who I provided care for too, so excuse me if I missed News at 10, or didn’t read the correct page of the newspapers, or that my circle of friends/colleagues didn’t discuss this topic, we were busy making ends meet.

I don’t want or expect any pension back pay but I can’t vilify those women who didn’t know about the changes, as has been said before, there wasn’t social media, and home computer weren’t as widespread at the time.

From what I’ve heard the WASPI findings will support a payment but then Parliament will block it because it will be too expensive.

There are certainly some women who would not have been aware but ignorance of the law has never been an excuse I’m afraid. Unfortunately where the criticism comes is when many of us have been aware of people who knew but have said that they weren’t sent a letter and want compensation. I’ve also seen many women post about getting an Automatic Pension Forecast which contained a booklet explaining the rises and then saying that the forecast didn’t tell them. 

The information was always out there but many women took no notice simply because retirement was too far away and they weren’t even thinking about it. We were all busy with work, children, caring etc. 

Pollycat

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for. 

Notification basically takes many forms and is why the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004 as the information to notify yourself was always there. We had a Budget speech in 1993 followed by numerous reporting of it via TV, Radio and newspapers (all of them and not just the Financial Times as some want you to believe). Over the years we’ve had notification via employers, forecasts, newspapers and mostly word of mouth. The passing of the Acts themselves is notification. 

The PHSO ended up finding a very small window of maladministration, not because there was no notification but because there was a delay in sending out personal letters once the DWP had made a decision to do so. This went against the upgraded Civil Service Code of Conduct which expected the DWP to act on information in a timely manner. 

Most of us 50s’ born women knew all about the changes from way back in the 90s. It was well talked about. It was on,y with the advent of the Waspi campaign that suddenly women were talking about not being notified by personal letter. Waspi moderators were busy telling people on their Facebook site not to say they knew but to say they had not received a letter. Waspi convinced women that this would mean maladministration and a return of their up to 6 years pension. Even Bindman’s (their solicitors) produced a template which told them to claim what they would have got from 60 to new state pension age as their financial loss. 

Of course that was never going to be the case as they’ve been finding out. Many of us tried to tell them that over the last 7 years but we have been described as detractors, trolls, Government spies etc, etc. Then of course came the blocking and banning of anyone who tried to correct misinformation and lies. It got worse after the first PHSO report was published and it still happens today. 

Basically they have run a bad campaign and listened to nobody who tried to help. 

I know all of this.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for the last 8 or more years.

I listened to the parliamentary debates.

Please read my later post that explains my post that you quoted.

Pollycat

Andy_L said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

I think WASPI's campaign was poorly thought out (as per Silvertabby said:

The WASPE hierarcy believe that it would be fair and equitable for women born before 6 April 1960 to receive their pensions backdated to age 60, but that their friends/sisters born on or after 6 April 1960 (just one day later) can jolly well wait until age 66.  

I fall into the WASPI category but have not supported this organisation.
I firmly believe that a man and woman born on the same day should receive their state pension on the same day.
That is how I understand equality.

If WASPI had concentrated on the later change (which was notified by letter) that - at incredibly short notice - increased pension age to 66, I would have supported it.
I had known since 1995 that my state pension date would be April 2017 (aged 63 years and 6 months).
The second change put that back to July 2018 (aged 64 years and 9 months).

Now that was inadequate notice.

In one of the court cases one of the WASPIs submitted the very letter informing her of the change, somewhat undermining their own case

I know that.
It made me laugh out loud.
FTR:
the letter was about the later (2010?) change, not the 1995 change because - as we all know - individual letters were not sent out about the 1995 change.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for at least the last 8 years.

jem16

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for. 

Notification basically takes many forms and is why the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004 as the information to notify yourself was always there. We had a Budget speech in 1993 followed by numerous reporting of it via TV, Radio and newspapers (all of them and not just the Financial Times as some want you to believe). Over the years we’ve had notification via employers, forecasts, newspapers and mostly word of mouth. The passing of the Acts themselves is notification. 

The PHSO ended up finding a very small window of maladministration, not because there was no notification but because there was a delay in sending out personal letters once the DWP had made a decision to do so. This went against the upgraded Civil Service Code of Conduct which expected the DWP to act on information in a timely manner. 

Most of us 50s’ born women knew all about the changes from way back in the 90s. It was well talked about. It was on,y with the advent of the Waspi campaign that suddenly women were talking about not being notified by personal letter. Waspi moderators were busy telling people on their Facebook site not to say they knew but to say they had not received a letter. Waspi convinced women that this would mean maladministration and a return of their up to 6 years pension. Even Bindman’s (their solicitors) produced a template which told them to claim what they would have got from 60 to new state pension age as their financial loss. 

Of course that was never going to be the case as they’ve been finding out. Many of us tried to tell them that over the last 7 years but we have been described as detractors, trolls, Government spies etc, etc. Then of course came the blocking and banning of anyone who tried to correct misinformation and lies. It got worse after the first PHSO report was published and it still happens today. 

Basically they have run a bad campaign and listened to nobody who tried to help. 

I know all of this.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for the last 8 or more years.

I listened to the parliamentary debates.

Please read my later post that explains my post that you quoted.

Yes I know you know all of this but you do seem to be concentrating on the personal letter as the only form of notification. It’s not of course. 

jem16

Pollycat said:

TAndy_L said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

I think WASPI's campaign was poorly thought out (as per Silvertabby said:

The WASPE hierarcy believe that it would be fair and equitable for women born before 6 April 1960 to receive their pensions backdated to age 60, but that their friends/sisters born on or after 6 April 1960 (just one day later) can jolly well wait until age 66.  

I fall into the WASPI category but have not supported this organisation.
I firmly believe that a man and woman born on the same day should receive their state pension on the same day.
That is how I understand equality.

If WASPI had concentrated on the later change (which was notified by letter) that - at incredibly short notice - increased pension age to 66, I would have supported it.
I had known since 1995 that my state pension date would be April 2017 (aged 63 years and 6 months).
The second change put that back to July 2018 (aged 64 years and 9 months).

Now that was inadequate notice.

In one of the court cases one of the WASPIs submitted the very letter informing her of the change, somewhat undermining their own case

I know that.
It made me laugh out loud.
FTR:
the letter was about the later (2010?) change, not the 1995 change because - as we all know - individual letters were not sent out about the 1995 change.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for at least the last 8 years.

It wasn’t a letter. It was a joint forecast of her occupational pension and her state pension as was common back then. She received it in 2006 and therefore was only about the 1995 Act and clearly told her that her state pension age was 65. This was still regarded as notification. 

Pollycat

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for. 

Notification basically takes many forms and is why the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004 as the information to notify yourself was always there. We had a Budget speech in 1993 followed by numerous reporting of it via TV, Radio and newspapers (all of them and not just the Financial Times as some want you to believe). Over the years we’ve had notification via employers, forecasts, newspapers and mostly word of mouth. The passing of the Acts themselves is notification. 

The PHSO ended up finding a very small window of maladministration, not because there was no notification but because there was a delay in sending out personal letters once the DWP had made a decision to do so. This went against the upgraded Civil Service Code of Conduct which expected the DWP to act on information in a timely manner. 

Most of us 50s’ born women knew all about the changes from way back in the 90s. It was well talked about. It was on,y with the advent of the Waspi campaign that suddenly women were talking about not being notified by personal letter. Waspi moderators were busy telling people on their Facebook site not to say they knew but to say they had not received a letter. Waspi convinced women that this would mean maladministration and a return of their up to 6 years pension. Even Bindman’s (their solicitors) produced a template which told them to claim what they would have got from 60 to new state pension age as their financial loss. 

Of course that was never going to be the case as they’ve been finding out. Many of us tried to tell them that over the last 7 years but we have been described as detractors, trolls, Government spies etc, etc. Then of course came the blocking and banning of anyone who tried to correct misinformation and lies. It got worse after the first PHSO report was published and it still happens today. 

Basically they have run a bad campaign and listened to nobody who tried to help. 

I know all of this.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for the last 8 or more years.

I listened to the parliamentary debates.

Please read my later post that explains my post that you quoted.

Yes I know you know all of this but you do seem to be concentrating on the personal letter as the only form of notification. It’s not of course. 

I'm not concentrating on the personal letter.
It's WASPI who are concentrating on the personal letter (or lack of).

All I did was ask one poster (back on page 1) if she had received a personal letter telling her about the changes in 1995.

Of course I knew that she hadn't because I knew that letters were never sent out.

A leaflet attached to a pay slip is not a notification, because of course, a lot of women at that time were housewives and didn't work so didn't have a pay slip.
They possibly didn't go to the hairdressers or read magazines or watch News at 10.
All I can say is that I knew about the changes.

One person misunderstood my question about the letter and everybody seems to have followed suit.

I did not expect to have been sent a personal letter about the 1995 changes.
WASPI apparently did expect that.

Pollycat

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

TAndy_L said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

I think WASPI's campaign was poorly thought out (as per Silvertabby said:

The WASPE hierarcy believe that it would be fair and equitable for women born before 6 April 1960 to receive their pensions backdated to age 60, but that their friends/sisters born on or after 6 April 1960 (just one day later) can jolly well wait until age 66.  

I fall into the WASPI category but have not supported this organisation.
I firmly believe that a man and woman born on the same day should receive their state pension on the same day.
That is how I understand equality.

If WASPI had concentrated on the later change (which was notified by letter) that - at incredibly short notice - increased pension age to 66, I would have supported it.
I had known since 1995 that my state pension date would be April 2017 (aged 63 years and 6 months).
The second change put that back to July 2018 (aged 64 years and 9 months).

Now that was inadequate notice.

In one of the court cases one of the WASPIs submitted the very letter informing her of the change, somewhat undermining their own case

I know that.
It made me laugh out loud.
FTR:
the letter was about the later (2010?) change, not the 1995 change because - as we all know - individual letters were not sent out about the 1995 change.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for at least the last 8 years.

It wasn’t a letter. It was a joint forecast of her occupational pension and her state pension as was common back then. She received it in 2006 and therefore was only about the 1995 Act and clearly told her that her state pension age was 65. This was still regarded as notification. 

OK.

I've always been OK with the notification I received about the pension age change.

But then again, I tend to read everything and take notice.
I have a background in occupational pensions as I know you have.

jem16

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for. 

Notification basically takes many forms and is why the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004 as the information to notify yourself was always there. We had a Budget speech in 1993 followed by numerous reporting of it via TV, Radio and newspapers (all of them and not just the Financial Times as some want you to believe). Over the years we’ve had notification via employers, forecasts, newspapers and mostly word of mouth. The passing of the Acts themselves is notification. 

The PHSO ended up finding a very small window of maladministration, not because there was no notification but because there was a delay in sending out personal letters once the DWP had made a decision to do so. This went against the upgraded Civil Service Code of Conduct which expected the DWP to act on information in a timely manner. 

Most of us 50s’ born women knew all about the changes from way back in the 90s. It was well talked about. It was on,y with the advent of the Waspi campaign that suddenly women were talking about not being notified by personal letter. Waspi moderators were busy telling people on their Facebook site not to say they knew but to say they had not received a letter. Waspi convinced women that this would mean maladministration and a return of their up to 6 years pension. Even Bindman’s (their solicitors) produced a template which told them to claim what they would have got from 60 to new state pension age as their financial loss. 

Of course that was never going to be the case as they’ve been finding out. Many of us tried to tell them that over the last 7 years but we have been described as detractors, trolls, Government spies etc, etc. Then of course came the blocking and banning of anyone who tried to correct misinformation and lies. It got worse after the first PHSO report was published and it still happens today. 

Basically they have run a bad campaign and listened to nobody who tried to help. 

I know all of this.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for the last 8 or more years.

I listened to the parliamentary debates.

Please read my later post that explains my post that you quoted.

Yes I know you know all of this but you do seem to be concentrating on the personal letter as the only form of notification. It’s not of course. 

A leaflet attached to a pay slip is not a notification, because of course, a lot of women at that time were housewives and didn't work so didn't have a pay slip.

A leaflet was notification to the person who received it. 

Yes Waspi expects (wrongly) that notification must be by personal letter. Yet there are many who are claiming never to have received that letter even though they were sent out. 

Pollycat

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for. 

Notification basically takes many forms and is why the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004 as the information to notify yourself was always there. We had a Budget speech in 1993 followed by numerous reporting of it via TV, Radio and newspapers (all of them and not just the Financial Times as some want you to believe). Over the years we’ve had notification via employers, forecasts, newspapers and mostly word of mouth. The passing of the Acts themselves is notification. 

The PHSO ended up finding a very small window of maladministration, not because there was no notification but because there was a delay in sending out personal letters once the DWP had made a decision to do so. This went against the upgraded Civil Service Code of Conduct which expected the DWP to act on information in a timely manner. 

Most of us 50s’ born women knew all about the changes from way back in the 90s. It was well talked about. It was on,y with the advent of the Waspi campaign that suddenly women were talking about not being notified by personal letter. Waspi moderators were busy telling people on their Facebook site not to say they knew but to say they had not received a letter. Waspi convinced women that this would mean maladministration and a return of their up to 6 years pension. Even Bindman’s (their solicitors) produced a template which told them to claim what they would have got from 60 to new state pension age as their financial loss. 

Of course that was never going to be the case as they’ve been finding out. Many of us tried to tell them that over the last 7 years but we have been described as detractors, trolls, Government spies etc, etc. Then of course came the blocking and banning of anyone who tried to correct misinformation and lies. It got worse after the first PHSO report was published and it still happens today. 

Basically they have run a bad campaign and listened to nobody who tried to help. 

I know all of this.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for the last 8 or more years.

I listened to the parliamentary debates.

Please read my later post that explains my post that you quoted.

Yes I know you know all of this but you do seem to be concentrating on the personal letter as the only form of notification. It’s not of course. 

A leaflet attached to a pay slip is not a notification, because of course, a lot of women at that time were housewives and didn't work so didn't have a pay slip.

A leaflet was notification to the person who received it. 

But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

jem16 said:

Pollycat said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

As someone who falls into the WASPI age group this campaign frustrates the hell out of me simply because it doesn't make sense.  They state that they had no notice of the changes and therefore could not make arrangements for their financial security.  Well we were notified in 1995 that the age would start increasing from 2010.  By my calculation that's 15 years, maybe some of these women should educate themselves and start reading or at least watch the news.  Also what financial insecurity is there?  You just carry on working that gives you the money to spend.  If you still finish work at 60 knowing you're not going to get a pension then more fool you!!

These women no doubt want equality with men in all things except this because on this one they lose out.  Even though I would get a load of money if they win I really hope they don't as there are much better things the Government should be spending their money on, certainly not this.

But were we actually notified?
Did you receive a letter telling you that?
I think that is WASPI's point.

I certainly knew about it as it was widely discussed and in the company I worked for, HR ran sessions to educate women about this change.

Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for. 

Notification basically takes many forms and is why the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004 as the information to notify yourself was always there. We had a Budget speech in 1993 followed by numerous reporting of it via TV, Radio and newspapers (all of them and not just the Financial Times as some want you to believe). Over the years we’ve had notification via employers, forecasts, newspapers and mostly word of mouth. The passing of the Acts themselves is notification. 

The PHSO ended up finding a very small window of maladministration, not because there was no notification but because there was a delay in sending out personal letters once the DWP had made a decision to do so. This went against the upgraded Civil Service Code of Conduct which expected the DWP to act on information in a timely manner. 

Most of us 50s’ born women knew all about the changes from way back in the 90s. It was well talked about. It was on,y with the advent of the Waspi campaign that suddenly women were talking about not being notified by personal letter. Waspi moderators were busy telling people on their Facebook site not to say they knew but to say they had not received a letter. Waspi convinced women that this would mean maladministration and a return of their up to 6 years pension. Even Bindman’s (their solicitors) produced a template which told them to claim what they would have got from 60 to new state pension age as their financial loss. 

Of course that was never going to be the case as they’ve been finding out. Many of us tried to tell them that over the last 7 years but we have been described as detractors, trolls, Government spies etc, etc. Then of course came the blocking and banning of anyone who tried to correct misinformation and lies. It got worse after the first PHSO report was published and it still happens today. 

Basically they have run a bad campaign and listened to nobody who tried to help. 

I know all of this.

I've been posting on WASPI threads on MSE for the last 8 or more years.

I listened to the parliamentary debates.

Please read my later post that explains my post that you quoted.

Yes I know you know all of this but you do seem to be concentrating on the personal letter as the only form of notification. It’s not of course. 

A leaflet attached to a pay slip is not a notification, because of course, a lot of women at that time were housewives and didn't work so didn't have a pay slip.

Yes Waspi expects (wrongly) that notification must be by personal letter. Yet there are many who are claiming never to have received that letter even though they were sent out. 

Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.

Qyburn

Pollycat said:

A leaflet attached to a pay slip is not a notification, because of course, a lot of women at that time were housewives and didn't work so didn't have a pay slip.

I seems quite obvious that it was a notification to that particular person. Or is the claim that these didn't count because not everyone got one? The campaign claims that every single person within the affected age range (plus another 300 odd thousand outside that range) have all been forced into financial hardship. That figure includes all those who became aware, by whatever means, so is making the assumption that they continued to rely on getting their pension at age 60 even after being told they wouldn't.

And again, what about those born in 1960 or later? Born before 1960 = everyone entitled to rely on SP at age 60 and should be compensated. Born after 1960 = should have been perfectly aware and tough luck if they didn't plan accordingly.

I guess the main players in the campaign includes those born were born late 1959, and the campaign crafted accordingly.