We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
WASPE "On Brink Of Defeat"
Comments
-
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.0 -
What WASPI allege does not surprise me at all.Qyburn said:
Yes, given in the article quoted ..Do WASPI claim that "every single person within the affected age range (plus another 300 odd thousand outside that range) have all been forced into financial hardship"?
"It is estimated that around four million women were pushed into financial hardship as their retirement plans were knocked off course."
vs as cited earlier, an actual population of 3.6 million in that age range.
And how much credence can anyone put on an estimated figure?
All I can do is reiterate:
Neither the 1995 Act or the later Act pushed me personally into financial hardship.
WASPI do not speak for me regarding the impact of the Acts that took the woman's state pension age to 66 years.
Nor do they speak for my personal financial situation caused by those Acts.0 -
WASPI can claim whatever they like - regardless of what actually happened.Qyburn said:
Even more so because their argument seems to that this hardship was caused by lack of notification. Yet they can't surely claim that not one single affected person was made aware.That clearly has to be nonsense.
WASPI do not speak for me.
I was fully aware of what was happening.
And I really think that more women were aware of the changes than have actually admitted it.
'jumping on the cash bandwagon' seems to be an appropriate phrase.
I know that people posting on the many WASPI threads who were not 'pushed into financial hardship' by these changes supported a means tested solution for the women who really were affected.
But of course that would have excluded the first class travelling, champagne-swilling high profile supporters.0 -
Pollycat said:
But apparently WASPI woman did.
My comments were aimed at someone who said they received a personal letter about the 1995 changes.
I disagree with that.
To be clear:
There was no personal notification about the 1995 Act changes.
This has been acknowledged by the government and DWP (or whatever it was called at that time).
I never said I received a personal letter. You should read people's posts properly first before quoting them. I said all staff, both men and women received a letter attached to their payslips. No way could you interpret that as a personal letter, if it were then why would men receive one?
And you need to go back and read your original question to me which asked if I was notified, not did I receive a personal letter. Yes I was notified, and I watched TV and read newspapers so I was well notified. If some women didn't choose to keep abreast of what was going on around them that's their problem.
You state you're not a WASPI woman but in the words of Hamlet "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."0 -
I am confused. How does working for 5 extra years instead of drawing state pension push people into financial hardship when working pays much more than the pension?Pollycat said:
WASPI can claim whatever they like - regardless of what actually happened.Qyburn said:
Even more so because their argument seems to that this hardship was caused by lack of notification. Yet they can't surely claim that not one single affected person was made aware.That clearly has to be nonsense.
WASPI do not speak for me.
I was fully aware of what was happening.
And I really think that more women were aware of the changes than have actually admitted it.
'jumping on the cash bandwagon' seems to be an appropriate phrase.
I know that people posting on the many WASPI threads who were not 'pushed into financial hardship' by these changes supported a means tested solution for the women who really were affected.
But of course that would have excluded the first class travelling, champagne-swilling high profile supporters.3 -
I have no idea.GrubbyGirl_2 said:
I am confused. How does working for 5 extra years instead of drawing state pension push people into financial hardship when working pays much more than the pension?Pollycat said:
WASPI can claim whatever they like - regardless of what actually happened.Qyburn said:
Even more so because their argument seems to that this hardship was caused by lack of notification. Yet they can't surely claim that not one single affected person was made aware.That clearly has to be nonsense.
WASPI do not speak for me.
I was fully aware of what was happening.
And I really think that more women were aware of the changes than have actually admitted it.
'jumping on the cash bandwagon' seems to be an appropriate phrase.
I know that people posting on the many WASPI threads who were not 'pushed into financial hardship' by these changes supported a means tested solution for the women who really were affected.
But of course that would have excluded the first class travelling, champagne-swilling high profile supporters.
Maybe ask WASPI...0 -
Yes, you're right.GrubbyGirl_2 said:Pollycat said:
But apparently WASPI woman did.
My comments were aimed at someone who said they received a personal letter about the 1995 changes.
I disagree with that.
To be clear:
There was no personal notification about the 1995 Act changes.
This has been acknowledged by the government and DWP (or whatever it was called at that time).
I never said I received a personal letter. You should read people's posts properly first before quoting them. I said all staff, both men and women received a letter attached to their payslips. No way could you interpret that as a personal letter, if it were then why would men receive one?
And you need to go back and read your original question to me which asked if I was notified, not did I receive a personal letter. Yes I was notified, and I watched TV and read newspapers so I was well notified. If some women didn't choose to keep abreast of what was going on around them that's their problem.
You didn't say you received a personal letter.
You actually said 'leaflet' - which is not actually a letter.
Your posts on here are pretty vicious towards WASPI women.
At least I and some others accepted that some women had been put into financial hardship by this change.
This ^^^ is hilarious.GrubbyGirl_2 said:Pollycat said:
But apparently WASPI woman did.
My comments were aimed at someone who said they received a personal letter about the 1995 changes.
I disagree with that.
To be clear:
There was no personal notification about the 1995 Act changes.
This has been acknowledged by the government and DWP (or whatever it was called at that time).
You state you're not a WASPI woman but in the words of Hamlet "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
As I said up-thread:Pollycat said:
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.
You may think what you wish.
At least I have some understanding and sympathy to women who were affected.
0 -
jem16 said:
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
Letters were not sent out immediately after the 1995 changes.jem16 said:
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
That is my point.0 -
If they had been then they would have been mostly ignored as too far away. APFs were sent from 2003 to 2006 and contained the information.Pollycat said:jem16 said:g
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
Letters were not sent out immediately after the 1995 changes.jem16 said:
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
That is my point.The main point though is that the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004. His stage 1 Report states a 28 month maladministration window. At no point has he said that letters about the 1995 Act should have been sent immediately.All women born 6th April 1950 onwards were affected. Why does the maladministration only affect those born before 6th April 1960?0 -
jem16 said:
If they had been then they would have been mostly ignored as too far away. APFs were sent from 2003 to 2006 and contained the information.Pollycat said:jem16 said:g
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
Letters were not sent out immediately after the 1995 changes.jem16 said:
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
That is my point.The main point though is that the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004. His stage 1 Report states a 28 month maladministration window. At no point has he said that letters about the 1995 Act should have been sent immediately.All women born 6th April 1950 onwards were affected. Why does the maladministration only affect those born before 6th April 1960?
I don'y know why.jem16 said:
If they had been then they would have been mostly ignored as too far away. APFs were sent from 2003 to 2006 and contained the information.Pollycat said:jem16 said:g
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
Letters were not sent out immediately after the 1995 changes.jem16 said:
As we have said before, there is no legal obligation to personal letters as notification. Notification takes many forms. If someone received a leaflet attached to a payslip then they were personally notified. If someone received a state pension forecast or a combined pension forecast then they have been personally notified. Legally the passing of the Act itself is notification.Pollycat said:
But many women were not in a position to receive the leaflet.jem16 said:
A leaflet was notification to the person who received it.Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Are you talking about the 1995 or later change?jem16 said:Pollycat said:jem16 said:
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.Pollycat said:
I know all of this.jem16 said:
Waspi has relied on notification by personal letter which of course there is no legal obligation for.Pollycat said:
But were we actually notified?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.
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.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'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.
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.
Because I thought it had been acknowledged that personal letters were not sent out for the 1995 change.
I knew simply because I paid attention to Budgets. I cannot say I didn't know simply because I didn't receive a personal letter.
Letters began in 2009 and did indeed cover the 1995 Act changes. That has been acknowledged. All women born prior to 6th April 1953 were indeed sent a letter about the 1995 changes. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise as even the PHSO Stage 1 report acknowledges this.
Those who were affected by the 2011 Act as well did not receive their letters until 2012/13. If they had received an earlier letter about the 1995 Act, then they would have had to have been sent yet another one as the first one would no longer have been correct.
But the point is that had the DWP never mentioned sending letters and then, according to the PHSO, taking too long to get started on them then there never would have been any maladministration.
That is my point.The main point though is that the PHSO found no maladministration from 1995 to 2004. His stage 1 Report states a 28 month maladministration window. At no point has he said that letters about the 1995 Act should have been sent immediately.All women born 6th April 1950 onwards were affected. Why does the maladministration only affect those born before 6th April 1960?
Why did PHSO find this?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 246K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards