Victory for campaign groups as high court orders judicial review of women's state pension age increases

Published by Rachel Lacey on 03 December 2018.
Last updated on 03 December 2018

Woman and a piggy bank

A high court judge has granted a judicial review to determine whether recent increases to women’s state pension age were lawful.

The case was brought by BackTo60, a campaign group representing women born in the 1950s who have borne the brunt of recent of increases to the state pension age.

Until 2010 women received their state pension at age 60. However, this has gradually been increasing and currently state pension age is 65 for both men and women and will increase to 67 by 2028.

State pension ages rose faster for women, in order for them to be equalised with men’s.

BackTo60 and other campaign groups, notably WASPI (Women Against State Pension Increases) argue that many women born in the 1950s were not warned of the changes and have suffered financial hardship as a result.

BackTo60 is campaigning for all women born during the 1950s to have their financial position restored to the position it would have been, had the state pension age remained at 60.

Commenting on the decision, Nathan Long, senior analyst at Hargeaves Lansdown says: “The state pension is the bedrock of retirement income for everyone and needs to be preserved to ensure people can retire with confidence.

"With people living longer raising the state pension age seems sensible, the problem is that doing so creates people who miss out under the system.

“It’s hard not to feel sympathy for the women have seen their retirement age jump so significantly and the manner in which the changes were communicated remains perhaps the biggest bone of contention.

"The judicial review looks to be the best chance to challenge the amendments as the government has continually stonewalled the issue, claiming the cost of not equalising state pensions is prohibitively expensive.’

A date for the review is yet to be set.

Pensions made simple with PensionBee

  • Combine your old and lost pension pots into one online plan
  • Take complete control and have 24/7 access to your pension balance
  • Your own dedicated BeeKeeper (account manager)
  • Make withdrawals online from the age of 55

Leave a comment

Regarding the judicial review

Regarding the judicial review of women's state pension age, my wife is 62 and has paid national insurance contributions for well over 30 years. However she had to stop working earlier this year due to Alzheimer's and will never be able to work again. Yet she cannot draw her state pension for another 4 years. There has to be something wrong with a system which penalizes women (or indeed men) in this way.

Women keep crying out for

Women keep crying out for equality but don't like it when they get it, why should women get their state pension earlier than men it's unfair on men. Every time a rule changes there are winners and losers which is OK as long as women are never the losers, they have had years to prepare for it but ignored all warnings until it hit them.

You have missed the point

You have missed the point entirely. Most women agree the age should be equal but, initially, the government were introducing it gradually. I received a letter when I was in my 50s from DWP advising me I would get my state pension when I was 63. When I reached 63 they then advised the date had changed but I was NEVER informed of the change. Exactly what "warnings" are you referring to??

men were able to pay into a

men were able to pay into a private pension long before woman,woman brought the kids up,had part time jobs.and looked after other members of the family as well ie her mother ..your mother,it was unpaid work and bloody hard,men didnt have to do any of this,and to this day most still do not,dont dont you dare play the crying card thank you

Who ever wrote this article

Who ever wrote this article is wrong! There was hardly any notice this was going to happen and lot of women had no notice at all...It’s robbery of people who have paid into a system in good faith.. PM lies on this saying it was only an 18month delay when in fact it’s 5 years and more...

I totally agree, I did not

I totally agree, I did not receive any notification of the changes at all! It was when my expected pension did not arrive when I was 60 that I saw on the gov. website that I would now have to wait until I am nearly 67! Absolutely disgraceful and the government does nothing but lie.

For a woman born in 1957 the

For a woman born in 1957 the ‘new’ pension age is 66.

Tell me when we were warned

Tell me when we were warned about the pension age rising? I didn't know about it until I was 58!
Men generally earn more than women anyway as we have had the children we lose out on promotions & careers by taking breaks so how can that be equality? Men should stay at home & then mention equality!

About time too! I was born in

About time too! I was born in the 50's and have worked full time for 45 years, I recently had to give up my job to be an unpaid carer for my sister and aunt who have both had strokes. I do not receive any benefits and was counting on my pension to manage. I am now 62 and have never been so poor in my life thanks to the tories. I also did not receive any notification of the change, I actually heard about it on the news!

I am male and well retired I

I am male and well retired I have to agree, why should women be favoured with an earlier pension date they have a greater life expectancy & as a previous contributor said women want equality OK thats what you are getting "good isn't it" I believe totally in equality what a shame others obviously do not!

Women wanted fair equality.

Women wanted fair equality. There has been no such thing for years (certainly when I left school and worked for lower wages then my male colleagues) did you men care then. I THINK NOT.

It is onvious you are not

It is onvious you are not able to understand it has got nothing to do with pension dates and age. This is about being told you get it at 60 and not being told the dste was deffered for some a few months for me 3 year 6 months? Would you like someone to help themselves to your money and be told it is ok dint worry. For me it was £25,000 and 3 years six months additional NI contributions. Get wise on what this about before you place irresponsible comments

Born 1957, I have nothing in

Born 1957, I have nothing in my own right, I am living off my husbands state pension, we have now got to sell our house. This is because I don't get my state pension. So wrong.

Im so sorry you have to sell

Im so sorry you have to sell your home and very angry and resentful the government have put us in this position. Im 62 with chronic back pain unemployed at the moment and cant claim any benefits. I have debt as well. These fatcats are not in the real world. Keep strong and hopefully this high court appeal may get us our pension. I am depressed as well and trying to keep going.

You state the state pension

You state the state pension age for men and women is currently 65. According to the DWP it is 66. I am 64 and fighting for my pension BUT will not receive ANYTHING until I am 66.

Maybe you should have paid

Maybe you should have paid into the system yourself to get a pension, I paid in for 50 years to get my old pension so why should you get yours for free, your husband will get his for contributing and would get extra to support you when you retire if married to him.

Women should have to wait

Women should have to wait until same retirement as men to retire and get pension which has nothing to do with being a carer which is covered by carer's allowance. There was plenty of warning on TV, radio, press and internet. Men's pension age should have been reduced to match women then they could have increased it in stages for both over a 5 year period years ago for what you women keep demanding, equality., you only like equality when in favour of women.

You really don't get it do

You really don't get it do you? Even when someone else has already explained in words of very few syllables!! (1) Women are very obviously not objecting to equality. (2) We are questioning the way the changes were implemented. (3) This has negatively impacted those women born in the '50s. Simple.

I totally agree. Bearing in

I totally agree. Bearing in mind also we left school at 15 not 16 so have worked an extra year therefore paid more contributions towards our pension.

Which plenty of notice is

Which plenty of notice is this ? That’s the argument not enough Notice in regards to this of us being informed only of this filtered through in 2012 . Apparently government discussed in 1995 so we all must of been asleep then . Having been through a divorce in 2003 there was no discussion in regards to this as l would of reviewed my finances at that time . The governments have mislead women inc myself born in the 50s. I have already paid in excess of 40,000 into this and if l dnt reach nearly 67 that’s my hard earned money down the pan . Am sure if given the warning / opportunity many women could of made other provisions such as another pension scheme . This is what the argument is about . It’s not just about equality as men state pension age has increased for them upwards of 65.