The two legal views on the rights of 3.8 million 1950s women to get full restitution for their lost pensions

BackTo60 outside Royal Courts of Justice

The decision by Lord Justice Irwin and Mrs Justice Whipple to dismiss ALL claims of discrimination and failure to inform 3.8 million women born in the 1950s about the rise in their state pension age from 60 to 66 is in total contrast to the decision of Mrs Justice Lang who granted ALL the claims to be heard four months ago.

Obviously there is a big difference between permission for a judicial review to be granted so the case can be argued than a judicial hearing where the arguments are tested.

Nevertheless this startling contrast to me suggests that there are grounds for an appeal because the two judgments are so far apart. That is presumably why the two judges did not ban an appeal.

To remind people Mrs Justice Lang decided that even though the 1995 Pensions Act was passed 24 years ago the effect of the implementation of the Act was happening now and therefore this issue was subject to judicial review. She also agreed that both age and sex discrimination could be part of the hearing, and the issue on whether government action was contrary to EU directives on social security and whether people had been adequately informed about the changes.

The two judges have rejected all of this and upheld the case put by the Department of Work and Pensions in its entirety. No wonder the DWP is cock a hoop today.

They describe any challenge to primary legislation passed over 20 years ago as ” fatal” and they have published in detail all the attempts by the DWP to inform people. They have included discussions from 1993 onwards about changing the law as part of informing people.

But they abrogate any responsibility on whether the DWP did a good job or not. ” We are not in a position to conclude that the steps taken to inform those people affected by the changes to the state pension age for women were inadequate or unreasonable”.

They have also accepted the DWP’s argument that it was under no obligation to tell people at all and certainly not to individually informing anybody about the change because it was not written into the law.

This ruling should be a red line for MPs to insist in the future that any Parliamentary legislation that affects millions of people must include a clause requiring a ministry to individually inform the people affected in language they can understand and in good time.

Goodwill or good sense is obviously not enough to be left in the hands of individual ministers. It must be made mandatory that people are told.

The arguments over whether government action in handling the rise in the pension age contradicted EU directives amounted to age and sex discrimination or indirect legislation are complex.

But broadly the judges have accepted the DWP’s interpretation of the wording so as to exclude the changes to the pension age from any such directives.

They have also ruled out the role of the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women from having any bearing on the case.

” We have not been assisted by reference to CEDAW, it adds nothing to the claimaint’s case”, they say.

Their main argument is that the 1995 Pensions Act removed an advantage (my emphasis) that women had over men at the time they retired and anyway the decision was part of primary legislation which could not be challenged.

Jackie Jones, Labour MEP for Wales and an expert on CEDAW, says the judges have misunderstood the purpose of CEDAW which could make a possible grounds for appeal.

In her view the Judges did not consider the cumulative effect of unequal laws in the past on this particular group of women who were denied contributing to their own pensions when they worked part time which is one of the issues covered by CEDAW.

The judges also ruled out the recent victories in civil service and firefighters pensions having any bearing on the case because they involved transitional arrangements for work pensions rather than their right to a state pension.

Despite the harshness of the judgement the immediate effect has been to create widespread sympathy for the plight of the 50swomen in the media, among the general public and brought finally to national attention the whole issue.

It has also galvanised campaigners to fight on and with a general election on the horizon to put politicians in all political parties under pressure. It could cost the government, if it does nothing, 3.8 million votes from people who reliably go down to the polling station.

66 thoughts on “The two legal views on the rights of 3.8 million 1950s women to get full restitution for their lost pensions

  1. After initially feeling devastated that the case was dismissed, apparently without any consideration to the factors of cumulative discrimination of all kinds to 1950’s women. It ultimately made me, personally, even more determined to continue fighting for justice. How ironic, that defeat in one court has, as you say, created more publicity and sympathy in some quarters. Thank you David, for all your hard work.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. If they weren’t obliged to tell people why did they waste public money attempting to? If the outcome highlights an injustice to men not being able to retire until age 65, why does this then not reverse them to 60 and compensate their supposed injustice? Maybe they should ask for a Judicial Review!!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s strange how the Judges came to their decision because it wasn’t discriminatory to men when I left school at 15 and was told I would get a pension at 60 and up to 24 years ago when they decided they were going to change retirement age for women and not men theirs didn’t change till this year it is not about Equality at all it’s because the gov didnt keep up with the nat ins pot to pay pensions out they took out out of it instead. and now us 50s born are are paying for that misuse big style with no attempt whatsoever to help us. I am very angry that none of our evidence was accepted and I am doubting was even looked at properly after yesterday’s verdict. I will not and cannot let this get me down. I will carry on as normal and make adjustments where I can till I get my elusive pension another 2 years to wait thanks for nothing Judges. I am thinking myself lucky that I am not starting the 6 year wait again and nearly there my heart goes out to the ladies that still have 6 years or more to wait. Many thanks to all at back to 60 and you david. will keep thanking you all because I will always be grateful for everything you have done and continue doing to help us..


  3. Please press on with an appeal. I’ve had a lifetime of discrimination. I put career before having children and still struggled to be treated as an equal. I have no issue with pension ages being matched but in these circumstances how can anyone not see that a simple slower implementation would have been less traumatic for those involved. A jump of 6 years is just too much. I was constructively dismissed on age and sexual discrimination grounds and found it impossible to stay in that industry. I’m now having to set up a new venture using all my savings in an attempt to earn money for the next 6 years. It’s not working, not helped by Brexit, and I’m getting old and tired and sadly realizing I’m just not up to this sort of thing any more. I’m lucky to have a husband who can support me unlike so many others but I am used to paying my way. What a way to enter old age feeling I’m not worthy of a pension which I’d been promised.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. An excellent response David. As you rightly point out, how could the difference in judges’ rulings be so far apart? For Mrs Justice Lang to grant all the claims in November, and for the two judges to dismiss them all in one ruling does not seem to make sense. I also wonder why all this time was spent from the Judicial Review which took place in June until October – an extraordinarly long wait, to come to this conclusion.

    I believe the ruling was presented in a cold, uncaring manner – the hopes of all these women who have been waiting for so long, to be dismissed so abruptly within 2 minutes.

    Hopefully this has now brought the matter to national attention and it is about time that the media started to take this onboard and help 50’s women to gain justice.

    Liked by 2 people

    • The judges minds were made up and by the heartless way they treated our case, it’s now clear that the DWP was always going to win. The DWP needs to be seen to be capable of anything – keeps us in our place. They could never be seen to lose to a bunch of us older women. I would suggest everyone goes on to HMRC and checks their pension forecast – like me, you may get a shock, because it seems to me they haven’t been keeping records as there’s years of mine missing (even though I have all the dates of jobs worked) they have many years of mine missing. I urge you all – check your pension now. to ensure they’ve got it right. We worked in the years before equal pay and equal rights – how dare they now turn it around and say it was men who suffered. Seems a twisted tactic used to make women feel and/or appear powerless. We can and must fight on. Because, regardless of the horrendous way we’ve been treated – we ARE worth it.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I would like to thankyou for the update and for ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND ALL THE TEAM we must go on gutted at the out come dont think we ever stood a chance with this goverment but every one of you tried so hard its gonna be hard for all them women who are still on the bread line thinking of them thank you again

    Liked by 1 person

  6. You never know, if they stick to it and prove Ann Widdecombe wrong who is known to have said “they’ll soon go away”, something may come out of it?

    Here’s another write up.


    Liked by 1 person

    • Oh? I’m sure I watched a video of her after this decision and she said it was a disgrace. Maybe she’s changed her mind over the years?


  7. Utterly distraught at the outcome. Thought I and millions like me might finally get a break. Have to carry on skint and jobless depending on others to get by. Our own country is treating us like rubbish _demoralised disgusted and desperate.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. The outcome of yesterday was gutting for us all, but is nothing I did not expect. The ruling spoke for itself it took no evidence from our legal team into account on the malpractices of the DWP. The courts acceptance that it’s right for the DWP to penalise the 50’s women by not informing them?

    These women are not seeking something for nothing they only seek what they have paid.

    David is right as always. We have more power than any of us think.

    We all have to step up the game, we all communicate and support one another on this forum.

    THE TIME IS NOW !!!!

    Every last one of us need to prepare a draft letter or email, inundating MP’s, party leaders, unions, media, action groups, TV personalities and anyone else you can get support from. If your unsure ask your family or grandchildren.

    We are not going away, were here to stay. I sent blanket emails this morning to all manner of people this morning including Boris the hulk. I will send them again and again.

    We have numbers on our side, 3.8 million women plus their families, their friends. So think hard ladies we have the upper hand, that trump card. Come the general election which may only be a few weeks away. Any party out there would welcome 3.8+ million votes.

    In the mean time I’m sure our legal team will not be sitting on their hands. We can’t sit on ours. The more noise we make the more were heard. We are a force to be reckoned with and the government are going to be sick to death of hearing about our plight.

    They think Brexit is hell … this space the 50’s women could be your worst nightmare as our votes can make or break any of you.

    So in a nut shell let’s just add this to the long list of wrongs that have happened to the 50’s women. Turning those wrongs into a positive right.

    Give them all the strength of our commitment and the feelings of you all. Make your voices heard because only we can do that.


    Liked by 2 people

    • Exactly, down but not out – we are coming for what is rightfully ours and won’t give up until we get it.

      Thank you to the whole team – We are right behind you.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I agree with Dee. Only direct action on the streets of Westminster will do. So many women cannot afford a train ticket to London so we must crowd fund it. We should dress as beggars as that is what the Tories, always the Tories, have made most of us. We must stop them for the sake of all of the future generations. They must be given faith and hope for their old age or they will work till they expire. I am sick to my soul with being a parasite on my lovely host husband. We should not be doing that. We have all lost so much by being born the wrong gender in the fifties. Direct action. Beg in front of the houses of Parliament now. Anyone up for it???? I know yesterday made me so angry, it’s changed me. No more waiting for legal challenges. Show the Tories we are mad as hell.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I absolutely agree Liz. We all need to take to the streets!! I myself don’t have spare money to get to London, but I’d beg or borrow to make it happen. I am incandescent with rage about this judgement. Count me in!!


    • Now THAT’S fighting talk! Love it!

      I started yesterday. I went on the #BackTo60 hashtag on twitter straight after the verdict and tweeted Boris (and others, but mostly Boris as only he can act) my own thoughts and also retweeted dozens of heartfelt comments – as I could have done all night, they were ALL heartfelt, gut-wrenching, the shock and despair was palpable and so sad – but I kept at it and on every single tweet, whatever else I had, I had:

      “3.8 million votes. Just sayin.”

      Talk about blackmail!

      I think the Courts brought this forth as ‘a good day to bury bad news’ but it backfired – as David said, tons of publicity! – a lot of politicians were tweeting their displeasure at the way it all went yesterday, especially I think in light of that INSULT of less than a minute verdict knowing millions of women were going to be utterly devastated.- and they were talking of taking action in Parliament. Frank Field, an absolute angel, he’s been on our side for a lot longer than most on the green benches – from the off really – was just as vocal as I thought he’d be! Also the EDM (Early Day Motion).. and I’ve just momentarily forgotten the number, is it #2296?.. anyway that’s should get a few more signatures after yesterday! 😉

      So all is NOT lost ladies, chin(s) up!

      (I wasn’t quite sure how to put that without causing offence.. chin? chins? Compromised!) 👍😂

      Liked by 1 person

  9. I felt so thoroughly let down and dejected yesterday. Thank you David for all your hard work and for explaining why an appeal is necessary and might be successful. The one drawback is time, none of us are getting any younger and many of the 1950s women need assistance now.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. We did nothing wrong. Always understood as a child that gvt would pay women a oensuion when we retired. If we worked we had more pension. I worked over 44 yrs, many against gps advice. Redundant at just 57, then ill health. Found out casually at job centre no sp until past 64..”totally devastated.. Why did gvt steal my hard worked for pension.. Used redundancy to pay bills and scrape by.. Missed seeing sons and their families. Now heart problems, life a daily struggle. Betrayed by gvt who were elected to serve and look after us. Abolish gvt have a sovereign state.. Tories only looking after their own interest.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Disgusted by this I had no notice that my pension age had increased. I could have made other financial arrangements had I known. I am no on the poverty line with all the others. It’s disgraceful what governments get away with. My next vote will be going to the party that promises restitution for this appalling travesty.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. In 2009 I was told by HMRC that Blair and Brown had not implemented the law so my retirement age was still 60, yet we hear over and over that because it was decided in 1995 then that is that. I asked the questions that day because I had heard about the act but never been informed it was happening, and then was told it was not, so my FA for my private pension continued my plans at 60. I am not someone who doesn’t keep an ear to the ground, I do keep up with whats happening but if we are given information by HMRC which contradicts the legislation how on earth can we know for sure whats happening, and its this situation that tells every woman affected the reason why you never got a letter, because it was undecided until Cameron and Osborne came to power.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. What an absolute travesty. Why can’t the judges take into account that men and women didn’t start level (men retired 65 men women 60 for a very good reason) Lower pay for women threat sack if started family, lack of opportunity to build a pension mainly due to childcare responsibilities.Often you were unable be able to return afterwards.
    So where do you draw line between past intrenched understandings of retirement age and the reasoning behind it and the way things are for today’s young people.
    In my opinion it should have been when women reach Fiscal equality Retirement Age 2040!

    Liked by 2 people

  14. I am raging they do not care about us 60s woman. They are liars & thieves how dare they treat us this way. As for Ann Widecombe shame on her saying we’ll go away , not very Christian Ann , I bet your financially ok.
    I shall be E.mailing my M.P and others.
    We are the new suffraggettes and will not be removed.. Let’s have protest in all the Cities & Towns and band together to show those who have used our pension pot they are not going to make this injustice disappear. !!
    Thank you to all who are fighting this Cause for me & millions of other woman.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Let’s be fair. She is still working by publicly demonstrating her UTTER IGNORANCE to the entire world by publicly turning her back unconstructively on The European Parliament. At the reported age of 72 she can be drawing HER Old Age Pension.She has ensured that she can be seen as A VERY GREEDY, SELFISH PERSON, MORALLY BANKRUPT and a TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE EMBARRASSMENT TO DECENT CIVILIZED SOCIETY!
      She is the one that needs to go away without delay.


      • Often see Anne Widdecombe popping into Austins in Newton Abbot in Devon. The most expensive shop for miles around in Torbay. Designer brands of every kind.

        Liked by 1 person

  15. While all around many have their benefits denied the dwp words are believed by judges hmmm it seems what happened to the 20 billion surplus in the pension pot hmmm Tory’s hay

    Liked by 2 people

  16. David, my first thought was the difference between Lang and the next 2!!! If one thinks there is case to answer on all counts, then the others dismiss them- very odd.
    Also, what about John Cridlands recommendation to increase SP age one year for every ten. I would have had to have been 4 years old to address the massive hike to SP age!!!!
    Why was the later act allowed? That was the final, hearbreaking decision. I have limped on- physically as well as metaphorically – to 64 years and 8 months. Under original increase I would have got SP at 64 and 10 months. That was a huge shock at 58 years old, but now looks appealling!!!!!!
    Also if Scotland, Wales, London, Liverpool and some other areas get bus passes why don’t we all??????
    I am so down now over all this and time is ticking on. I have missed over 4 1/2 years of retirement with another 16 months in front of me.
    Let’s go for an appeal, as already mentioned we have empathy from a great many sources now. Let’s crowd fund and go for it- also, i am contacting mp, pm etc. .. we are huge- nearly 4 million, we deserve more

    Liked by 1 person

  17. ”We are not in a position to conclude that the steps taken to inform those people affected by the changes to the state pension age for women were inadequate or unreasonable”.
    – The Judges

    Then what on earth were they doing there?

    And why did a one minute verdict (with aspects of the case unmentioned even) take FOUR MONTHS?

    Liked by 1 person

    • I agree Liz727. What are the judges for if not to reach a conclusion? If they can’t do their job competently maybe they need to retire – no doubt on very fat pensions.

      Liked by 1 person

      • That lady judge is young. She’s only been a judge about a year. I think she was only put on out the case to take the bad look of it, you know, it wasn’t a nasty male judge doing that to older women, but I bet it was the men who decided. You have to look to see who appointed these judges..That’s who owns them.Tony Blair brought in the Supreme Court and appointed them. We should be able to elect who’s going to judge us. These people are so far removed from us they may as well be on a different planet.


  18. Thank you all for standing up and fighting for what is right …let’s not cry … our mother & grandmothers didn’t in the war… worked hard for very little pay…so we could have a fair and true England ….WHAT WENT WRONG …. Janet Boyle 64 ..

    Liked by 1 person

  19. They will regret the day they’ve underestimated us. 3.9 million of us will vote with our feet and protest in huge numbers so this robbery of our pension contributions will go down in hostory.
    As an NHS whistleblower too these politicians and judicial officials have severely let me down and cost me personally in excess of £60,000

    Liked by 2 people

  20. The way In which the rise in state pension age was implemented was totally inconsistent for different groups of people. I notice that the planned rise to 67 & 68 is spread over a much longer period. Surely this should set a precedent as to how the rise for 50s women should have been implemented over a much longer period. I was one of the part time workers who was not allowed to join a private pension scheme when I returned to work after my children started school. The law is supposed to always represent the ‘reasonable man’ . Where is the justice in all this?
    Kind Regards

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Please correct me if I am wrong, however the main dereliction of duty by the government was a total failure to replace the withdrawal of the state pension , with a compulsory obligation by employers to provide a private pension in its place.

    The law to provide private pensions came into force around 5 years ago?

    Add that to the appeal


  22. I think my most unfavourite thing about the decision was that the day before in the house of commons both sides of the house gave a standing ovation for a woman MP who had suffered domestic violence. The insidious misuse of financial power over women. Just so 2 faced its laughable. Also, Lord justice and Mrs justice. How unequal is that. Was she just his appendage then? Is that all we all are. Dependant on the financial superiority of our generation of males with all the power of pensions whilst we acted as Mother’s, carers etc. The Dwp obviously thinks that the men should honour their duty to keep us. That is dispickable. That is making partners poorer and women feel like parasites. At least I do. All because the mighty financial sector does not want to pay out all the private pensions. We have been the easy 🎯. They think.!!!! Thank goodness women do not feel they have to give up their autonomy nowadays. That’s why there will be no carers in the future. Domestic violence standing ovation. Huh.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. I have been reading comments made by the women in our groups and can hear the distress in there comments ,this makes me feel strength to carry on fighting this injustice the ruling doesn’t take away the fact the government went against a contract to give us our pension at 60 yrs of age and notice not given efficiently to allow us to put something in place .the government has failed and should be held accountable.50s born women should be compensated as we have most definitely been discriminated against.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Gilly M – I’m a single woman, age 60 and I retired from my primary career in November 2007 at the age of 48 with 30 years of NI contributions. I was my intention to retrain and follow another career path but after 18 months it became apparent that I was getting nowhere so I started looking for work. Fortunately I have worked for a further 9 years.

    Around about 2009 I contacted DWP and asked where I stood in relation to NI contributions and SP and was advised that I had payed the required 30yrs and if I didn’t wan’t to work again I would still get my pension at 60yrs of age.

    Why was I not informed of the changes to the women’s pension age in 2009, why was I told that I did not need to pay NI for longer? Had I not worked I would now be short of 6 yrs NI payments and probably not get a full pension. My financial loss from the change in SP is £56,000.

    There should be no difference between a state run pension scheme and a private one. There is a contract, a schedule of payments in over an agreed period of time from the client and out to the recipient at the end of the contract. If the terms and conditions of the scheme change then all parties should be notified. If all parties are not happy with the changes the client should be able to leave and take their money elsewhere. I would rather like to have my contributions returned to me so that I can invest them somewhere safe and trustworthy.

    It has been shown that the Government stole from the Pensions Pot like Peter paying Paul. Why is there not a criminal investigation into this theft or mismanagement of our pension fund. The contributions taken from us were to fund an insurance against illness and unemployment, and eventually provided retirement pensions and other benefits. They were not made to bail out other debts or shortages.

    The Pensions Regulator made Mr Green pay £363 million into the BHS pension fund, perhaps the same Regulator needs to take a look at our Pension system.

    Rather belatedly the Press has started giving us coverage of this injustice. It has been shameful to see the “Women’s” programmes on TV show disdain and disinterest in reporting the plight of so many women and yet jump into report on the recent rulings. How very smug they must feel with their inflated wages and private pensions.

    I do hope that the case is taken to appeal and that the Government and DWP are found guilty of gross negligence. Their conduct has been shameful.

    Liked by 3 people

    • I like the bit about the Pensions Regulator. Why don’t we put our case to them? There’s at least one precedent if BHS we made to pay back the money. How do we do that? Let’s just see what they have to say. If BHS man had to, the theft out of OUR money by the Govt should matter equally. The money was there, lots of it, it wasn’t Govt’s to take!


  25. I am devastated heartbroken and humiliated we 50’s born women have been wrongly robbed and an injustice to our human rights I only received notice 2 months before my 60 birthday in 2015 I am now 64 yrs old I have lost 4 yrs of my pension and I have 2 more yrs to wait I don’t have a penny I can’t afford to contribute to my daughter’s wedding and I can’t even go to it she lives in Australia I can’t leave my children or grandchildren anything when I die in fact I can’t even afford my own funeral it’s a cruel I justice that not only affects me but affects my whole family now I will be a burden for rest of my life to my family I feel betrayed and punished for being born when I was it’s an injustice to my human rights and why should we not fight it’s our right all those poor women who have died and lost out on Thier pensions, that money should still be paid to Thier family’s what they should have had a right to have

    Liked by 2 people

    • You sound so depressed just like me. But, fuck them all. As for your funeral, unfortunately I don’t expect you will die soon. I feel so jinxed, just like you. You are not alone. I think it helps if you know that. Weird I have just bought my cremation only funeral. If I could find a way to end it all I would. Tired of being a female and third class. If you can reply. Please do. I spent Thursday screaming at my lovely but always entitled husband and walking miles in the pouring rain. The next day I just got 😡

      Liked by 1 person

    • That’s a very good point about passing the money down to the family. At the very least, all the NI contributions that person paid in that he or she never got to enjoy.


    • Yes the families should get all the NI contributions the deceased person paid in for a lifetime that they didn’t get to enjoy. Why should the Govt get to keep it?


  26. The `historical asymmetry` has only been addressed at one end of the time scale, this end….. and in favour of the men. What about the the other end, the 1970s and 80s when women quite often stayed at home, did low paid part-time work, were underpaid for the same roles, were overlooked for promotions, were not allowed to join company pension schemes, have a mortgage and often gave up work to care for elderly relatives. None of that is relevant clearly, so I guess we need to focus on whether or not somebody should have ensured we knew what was happening. I took early retirement in 2010, in 2011 I found out I wouldn`t get my pension at 60, I have worked at times, downsized, battled cancer, looked after 2 elderly family members and now my husband and retired on ill-health. Maybe instead of donating to overseas or animal charities the wealth could `Sponsor a no-pensioner`. What an incredibly `emotionally poor` country we now live in.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. Frank Thor commented on the lack of coverage on news night last night fully supportive. My reply

    Contrived bollocks by the BBC directed by the bloody government. This country is ruled by a bunch of elitist self serving, tax dodging bastards. They have looked at history to get out of this the same history which created the problems of today. Women treated as second class to their partners/husband by giving the little women the opportunity to earn a bit pin money while only pay a little bit of a stamp to provide themselves with a little biddy pension because the men were seen as the bread winners. If that is not inequality I don’t know what is. The same women with their little jobs looked after the children, walked back and forward to schools, cleaned washed,ironed and had a hot meal on the table for their husbands coming in from a hard day at the pit, factories and other industries now largely defunct because of the successive ruling government mostly Tory. Care of the elderly fell on their shoulders not the men who after their meal spruced themselves up and ambled to the working men’s club to meet their mates(women were frowned on and in some of these establishments even not allowed). Now tell me we should not get our pensions the inequality was created by government denying women then the same perks as men. Even in their own elitist circles the women were no more than props for their lifestyle making sure everything ran smoothly at home so they could stamp on the poorest in our society and further the male ambitions which have created the have and have not shameless society I call my country. Absolutely abhorrent. History – His Story now we want Her Story and our dues

    Liked by 1 person

  28. I have worked over 50 years now and never had benefits apart from maternity when children were born. I took 3 months off and back to work. I could not get a mortgage on my own women were not allowed to borrow from banks etc. we were restricted in life men were the bread winners. We were never encouraged to join a private pension only rich people could afford that. We were never equal to men till very recently. I took ill health when I was 50 with a lung condition was on steroids for 2 years have osteoporosis and arthritis contributed with taking steroids. I have had to work to survive as we had a mortgage. I am tired and want to spend time at home with my husband whom for all our married lifes (nearly 46 yrs) have joked about retiring he is 1 year older than me being born in 1953 I always said that I would be retired 4 years before him and now he retired 1 year 7months before me. Why can that happen? all your lifes dreams shattered because the UK govt never informed us. No letters no notice. We paid our NI and our employers paid our NI where in that does it say the govt paid any? they didn’t they were suppose to be our bankers but instead they were our betrayors who stole our NI to pay of the National Debt

    Liked by 2 people

  29. That decision by the ‘judges’ was just awful! I have worked for (and paid NI contributions at differing rates) for 44 years. People now only need to make contributions for 30 years to get their state pension – this needs explaining to get young people on side – then there will (hopefully) be more people raising the roof about the way we women have be quite frankly ROBBED. I always thought a ‘promise to pay’ was a real promise, but now – I don’t even believe what is printed on banknotes!!! After all the Government could simply decide that a £5 note is only worth 10p and probably with the recent decision in the Courts they could do it so easily! Be afraid be very afraid and keep fighting for justice.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Watching the news this morning I despair at headlines. No deal Brexit and debt for this country to a 50 year high we could never imagine.

    Knife crime and pressure in hospitals.

    Uk productivity down again.

    Boris the hulks supposed affairs and grants given.

    Protestors over climate change.

    Pollutents in the air.

    Where are the 50’s women? …

    Apparently were to be discussed by head of DWP and labour and conservative MP’s. To talk about giving us a form of pension credit from the age of 63 till our pensions come in at 66. Plus they’re going to class us the same no matter what we have paid into our NI. In addition a form of pension credit for those who have no other pension .

    Look I may not have gone to Cambridge but to save you all this pratting about.
    Just pay all women born in the 1950’s their pensions due. By the time you’ve added up all your proposals above it will equate to the same amount.

    Like me we’re all sick to death of being pushed around and bloody well ignored. Even the judges in supreme Court didn’t hear the injustices we have suffered.

    I read the other day how many women have died awaiting this to be sorted.This is criminal, equality and diversity, human rights …..what a blasted farce. We’ve had none, we get none

    We’re just made to suffer, well till my last breath I will and I know my colleagues will fight this crime.

    You will never do to women again what you have done to us.


    Liked by 1 person

  31. The Judges conclusion that “the Government did not have an obligation to inform us” is yet another nail in the coffin of democracy in the UK . Is it any wonder why barely a third of voters in the UK trust politicians to act in their best.

    In relation to how far we can trust any Government to act fairly on this issue , I think a couple of statements I have taken from Polly Toynbee article Reporting her view on the Judicial outcome say it all..

    “ Here’s what stands out: governments have been slow to pass laws and slower still to enforce equality for women in every other field” ….. concluding with

    “The one and only equality for women imposed with a rod of iron was the equalisation of pension ages, because it saved the Treasury a fortune”

    Speaking of trust…

    As it stands at present ( and the big IF can Labour win the next election ) accessing our Pensions at 64 is the only real offer on the table that would help all of us all . So why did Mr Dromey make no mention of this in his official response taken from The Labour Partiy website below?

    Commenting on the High Court decision on 1950s women affected by the raising of the state pension age, Jack Dromey MP, Shadow Pensions Minister, said:“The 1950s women helped build Britain and were let down by the government’s pension changes. They will understandably be very disappointed by today’s finding.

    “Labour has already made commitments to support women affected, including by extending Pension Credit to hundreds of thousands of the most vulnerable women. We will consult further with the 1950s women affected as to what future support we can put in place once in government to help ensure that all these women have security and dignity in older age.”

    Could it be that they are not quite so committed to helping ALL of us? Can we in fact trust any Government to keep any pre-election promises to us on this issue? Sadly, I think not & have come to the conclusion that the only way I can ensure that this is the last winter that I will be faced with the decision ‘ do I put money into the gas meter to stay warm or eat anything beyond the cheapest most basic diet’? So I’m putting my house up for sale & will live off the proceeds.

    I give my wholehearted thanks to everybody who made this campaign possible & continue to fight on our behalf.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Very interesting comment, thank you.

      Polly Toynbee was spot on!

      And you’re right about Jack Dromey’s:
      ” MOST vulnerable women”.

      Who gets to decide what “most vulnerable” means? Because, Godstreuth, if it’s anything by those PIP assessments i.e. tick box medicals fby “medical professional” who must have been pulled in off the street for a day’s work at minimum wage. My “professional” who could not answer even one medical question and hardly looked up, just kept her eyes on her tick boxes on the computer! But it really doesn’t matter what’s wrong with you or what you say, you’re not going to get it. People with cages around their spines or dying in hospital are declared “fit to work” with nary a care in the world to the DWP who still get their big salaries after farming this work out to a PRIVATE company whose normal work was STATISTICS – nothing to do with health at all! – on a contract so lucrative, it would have been 10.times cheaper to leave the system the way it was. There have been so many mistakes at every level in every department that have likely cost the taxpayers a King’s ransom, I think we’d be horrified if we knew the full extent of it. It’s all such a sham really. We need better people in Government. The calibre of MPs (bar some notable exceptions, but only a handful) that we’ve had the last few decades are sadly lacking compared to the great men of old like Tony Benn and Michael Meacher, both now deceased, God rest their good souls. Would that we see their like again walking the halls of Parliament. Good, common-sense men, in politics out of love for and service to their Country, not like today’s crop and how many “expenses” they can get away with. I pray we get people worthy of the office again – asap!

      Thank you again for your great comment, onward and upward!


  32. David, please delete this “sorry” comment to “the lady above” as that comment DID post to where it should have and the since further comment really IS for the lady above (Lesley). Just to confuse everything further, sorry about that,.but my reply box is sometimes under the comment I want to reply to and sometimes jumps to the top of all the comments on the page and I’m not sure why!


  33. Thank you for everything you have done and are still doing on 1950’s women’s pension plight. I’m afraid all of my 1953 colleagues have all given up any hope of having any recompense as we are now receiving our pensions, having waited and missed out most unfairly. None has heard by letter or by phone from the DWP, which they said we had and are now saying there is/was no need for us to have been forewarned.
    I hope there’s a positive outcome for all as I feel many women have suffered because of this decision, myself included.


  34. How can it be, I’ve been discriminated against all my working life, and now EQUALITY, how is it I am been discriminated again in the name of equality. Many Thanks David

    Liked by 1 person

  35. reply from Boris Johnson, my MP ‘Equalising ..ensured SP remained sustainable..maximum increase capped at 18months. changes would complicate, cost taxpayers’. women effected were written to jan12-Nov13′ So no ‘fresh vigour,new eye’ – can’t be relied do ‘anything.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.