The WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) faces a new setback as a review by the ombudsman considering their claim has been delayed.
The campaigners are calling for compensation for a generation of women born in the 1950s who were affected when the state pension age for women increased from 60 to 65.
This meant millions of women had to adjust their plans for their retirement, with the campaigners claiming they were not given adequate notice of the change.
Their case is being considered by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, who ruled almost two years ago the DWP had failed to give the women adequate notice of the change.
The Ombudsman is now assessing how much harm was caused as a result and what compensation should be given to those affected.
READ MORE: Bank launches 5.4% one-year fixed rate saver and increases rates across savings accounts
This second stage of the investigation has been delayed owing to a legal challenge with no timescale given for when their decision will be published.
Labour MP Ruth Cadbury asked the Government for an update, with pensions minister Laura Trott responding to say “it would not be appropriate to comment on the investigation while it is ongoing”.
An update on the Ombudsman states: “We had intended to publish our final report by the end of March 2023.
“With a legal challenge brought against us, we have agreed to look again at part of our stage 2 report. Our final publication will be delayed while this takes place.
“We are confident that we have completed a fair and impartial investigation and, as an independent Ombudsman, our duty is to provide the right outcome for all involved and make sure justice is achieved.
“We hope this cooperative approach will provide the quickest route to remedy for those affected and reduce the delay to the publication of our final report.”
The WASPI campaign recently sent the Ombudsman a list of steps for how they think the investigation should proceed.
The 10 steps include:
- Complete the investigation with a sense of urgency
- Clearly and correctly identify when maladministration began
- Clearly and correctly identify when maladministration ended
- Reach a sound conclusion on what would have happened if women had been correctly notified of the changes to their state pension age
- Make realistic findings on direct financial losses
- Look at the lost opportunities for women to make different financial decisions
- Properly consider the distress, anger and hurt of those affected
- Take account of varying impacts based on circumstances
- Reach conclusions in a fair manner including consultation with WASPI
- Make compensation recommendations that are fair, fast and straightforward.
A recent survey carried out by the campaigners found almost half of the WASPI women who took part had struggled to pay household bills over the past six months.
Angela Madden, chair of the WASPI campaign, said: “We’ve been completely overwhelmed by the response from 1950s-born women to our latest survey, showing the lasting impact of not being informed about state pension age changes.
“The devastating impacts on thousands of women could have been avoided had the DWP done their job.
“We’re also saddened by the latest findings from affected women which show this cohort is amongst the worst affected by the cost of living crisis.
“All their retirement savings have been used and many are desperately awaiting the fast and fair compensation they deserve.”
The state pension age is currently 66 for both men and women with plans to increase this gradually to 67 and then 68 over the coming years.
The full basic state pension is currently £156.20 a week while the full new state pension is £203.85 a week.
A person can check their state pension entitlement using the state pension forecast tool on the Government website.
A DWP spokesperson previously told Express.co.uk: “The Government decided over 25 years ago it was going to make the state pension age the same for men and women.
“Both the High Court and Court of Appeal have supported the actions of the DWP under successive governments dating back to 1995 and the Supreme Court refused the claimants permission to appeal.”
For the latest personal finance news, follow us on Twitter at @ExpressMoney_.
