Music1 min ago
For Women Who Were Denied Their Pension At 60
We all know that the pension age for women born in the fifties has been raised. Did you know a campaign called "Back to 60 movement "has won the right to a Judicial Review and is taking the DWP to the High Court ? On the 5th and 6th June they will attempt to get the 3.9 million women justice over non consultation in raising the pensionable to 66 and above. Michael Mansfield QC will lead the case and the argument for the movement. However there does not appear to be any media coverage regarding this significant event. That is why I am raising the awareness now. Let's hope and pray for justice rightly deserved.
Seems to be a media blackout on this issue which suggests that the government have put a block on the media reporting it.
Seems to be a media blackout on this issue which suggests that the government have put a block on the media reporting it.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by -SharonA-. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
this says an appeal hearing in July this year? They had a judicial review and were told no case. https:/
From last year,
https:/
No media blackout and no government block then.
https:/
No media blackout and no government block then.
What of the percentage of these 3.9 million women who actually don't want to retire at 60? When I was younger my mother knew lots of women forced to retire at 60 who were devastated to lose their jobs when they wanted to stay on. My neighbour just missed the deadline and now, although she has a good works pension and State pension, is bored stiff, misses her work colleagues to the point they all go for a drink (before CV-19) every week and is desperate to find a job, any job to keep her occupied. To be 60 in 2020 is much different from being 60 in 1970. I agree with the decision, and although I've paid in 35 years to my pension (some not full as I was not in the UK) I still think 66 is a fair age these days.
There are jobs, however, where expecting anyone, male or female, to do the job to their full ability at 66, is unreasonable, but I think these jobs are taken care of by private pensions being available from 55. Remember, N.I. contributions are not just towards your pension.
There are jobs, however, where expecting anyone, male or female, to do the job to their full ability at 66, is unreasonable, but I think these jobs are taken care of by private pensions being available from 55. Remember, N.I. contributions are not just towards your pension.
// Let's hope and pray for justice rightly deserved.//
the courts of england dispense er the law of england
not a airy fairy notion of justice
I thought this had been heard - res judicata - sorry legal thread so legal words - BUT it cd be appealed
JRs are 'new' ( last thirty years rather than three hundred ) so the rules for bringing a JR are in a code somewhere - and the grounds for appeal are as well
You can just march up to the Old Bailey and say to the doorman - "Please sir I want a judicial review"
as for a media black out over a subject so complex that no one udnerstand it - - - i dont think so
the courts of england dispense er the law of england
not a airy fairy notion of justice
I thought this had been heard - res judicata - sorry legal thread so legal words - BUT it cd be appealed
JRs are 'new' ( last thirty years rather than three hundred ) so the rules for bringing a JR are in a code somewhere - and the grounds for appeal are as well
You can just march up to the Old Bailey and say to the doorman - "Please sir I want a judicial review"
as for a media black out over a subject so complex that no one udnerstand it - - - i dont think so
well the leddy was right
The claimants’ grounds were that the mechanisms chosen to implement the increases in the pension age discriminated on grounds of age and/or sex. They also sought judicial review of the government’s “alleged failure to inform them of the changes.” However, the court dismissed the claim on all grounds (Delve and Glynn v SSWP – media summary). The Court of Appeal is to hear the appeal against this judgment on 21 July 2020 (Pensions Age, 24 Feb 2020). In response to questions on 9 March 2020, Pensions Minister, Guy Opperman said “full restitution would cost something in the region of £215 billion […] a case was before the courts last year: on all grounds, these ladies lost their case. Clearly, that matter is subject to appeal, but the case was lost in respect of every ground, including notice.”
and that boys and girls is from
https:/
The claimants’ grounds were that the mechanisms chosen to implement the increases in the pension age discriminated on grounds of age and/or sex. They also sought judicial review of the government’s “alleged failure to inform them of the changes.” However, the court dismissed the claim on all grounds (Delve and Glynn v SSWP – media summary). The Court of Appeal is to hear the appeal against this judgment on 21 July 2020 (Pensions Age, 24 Feb 2020). In response to questions on 9 March 2020, Pensions Minister, Guy Opperman said “full restitution would cost something in the region of £215 billion […] a case was before the courts last year: on all grounds, these ladies lost their case. Clearly, that matter is subject to appeal, but the case was lost in respect of every ground, including notice.”
and that boys and girls is from
https:/
The pension age has increased for everyone born since then, as well. When I was a child, my mum told me it was 60 for women and 65 for men, as women have the children and tend to do most of that part, so it was to equal it out a bit (me neither).
It was then changed to 65 and then 67, just in my memory. As I don't trust what they will do with it, I have never had a pension, only savings myself. I don't agree anyone should be forced to retire at a particular age and neither do I agree that someone of 66+ is incapable of doing a worthwhile job.
The reason the pensions were started at 60, is because that was the life expectancy for men at that time. Their life expectancy has increased by 14 years since then, but they are only expected to work for 2 extra years... and can't leave full-time education until 18. Even if you work full-time throughout the rest of your life, I still can't see how it all adds up to the majority supporting themselves, let alone others as well. While it sounds nice to have 20 years or so of retirement, it just doesn't seem practical really.
It was then changed to 65 and then 67, just in my memory. As I don't trust what they will do with it, I have never had a pension, only savings myself. I don't agree anyone should be forced to retire at a particular age and neither do I agree that someone of 66+ is incapable of doing a worthwhile job.
The reason the pensions were started at 60, is because that was the life expectancy for men at that time. Their life expectancy has increased by 14 years since then, but they are only expected to work for 2 extra years... and can't leave full-time education until 18. Even if you work full-time throughout the rest of your life, I still can't see how it all adds up to the majority supporting themselves, let alone others as well. While it sounds nice to have 20 years or so of retirement, it just doesn't seem practical really.
my issue with it is that women like me paid into the state pension scheme based on one set of promises and then much later on in our lives, we were told "yes you paid in for all of your working life and made financial decisions based on what we told you but we have decided something different now so suck it up" Even a year before I could draw my pension I was being told things that turned out not to be true which was "yes your late husbands pensionable years can be added to yours because he never drew his pension" which turned out not to be the case and right up until the time I was finally told what my pension would be, the lovely people at DWP who I phoned on a regular basis were saying "What we are telling you now is what we know but there is more instruction coming next week" Its not the fact that the pensionable age went up, although my friend whose birthday is in january and was born in the same year as me got her pension 18 minths before I did, its the way that the rules changed and changed and changed so we couldn't make new decisions when we frst were told about the changes because the detail kept changing and not for the better!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.