Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 12:58

Letskeepcalm · 16/11/2025 12:02

To be honest, somebody has seen a loophole and they're all jumping on the bandwagon is the jist of it

I suppose the person who saw the 'loophole' was the Financial Ombudsmen who recommended paying a relatively minor amount of compensation.

Sexentric · 16/11/2025 13:48

@Scotiasdarling you obviously do believe its morally right and fair that the 'waspi' women - I assume you are one? - get a payout. Can I ask why? Or do you just think it will be a nice little windfall?

Ticklyoctopus · 16/11/2025 13:49

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 12:58

I suppose the person who saw the 'loophole' was the Financial Ombudsmen who recommended paying a relatively minor amount of compensation.

If it’s minor why did they need so much more notice?

OP posts:
ObelixtheGaul · 16/11/2025 13:52

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 10:22

The 30s and under, meanwhile, have to accept that not only do they have to pay for you, and probably me, they also have to separately fund themselves. They won't benefit in anything like the same way, if at all. In all likelihood, many of them will still be working well after 65.

Hang on a second, it's not just those 30 and under.
Anyone born after April 1960 , including the late Boomers, have a state pension age of 66 plus .
Yes still working here age 59 and DH is 61 , still working, paying tax and paying into an occupational pension on top.

This idea that it's only people in their 30s working and paying is nonsense.

I didn't say anywhere people under 30 were the only ones working and paying. In the quote you posted, I clearly said they won't get the same benefit out of their payments. At 59 and 61, you and your husband will receive your pension at 67/68 Same as me and my husband in our 50s. We'll get more out than an under 30 is likely to, because the next significant change is not scheduled to happen until 2041.

Whilst it's possible we might experience a loss of triple lock, it's highly unlikely means testing will come into force before we claim, or that the age will rise to 70.

Whereas, somebody under 30 faces much less certainty that they will receive any state pension at all. That's the difference. You and I are working towards something that is now in our sights, continuing to pay for something we will take our turn at receiving.

Somebody under 30 isn't in that position. I am not saying, not have I ever said, that we shouldn't get our pensions or that we haven't worked and paid in. I am saying that we are now in a situation where the generations below us will be paying, just like we did, but are increasingly less likely to be receiving at any point shy of 70, if at all.

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 14:25

ObelixtheGaul · 16/11/2025 13:52

I didn't say anywhere people under 30 were the only ones working and paying. In the quote you posted, I clearly said they won't get the same benefit out of their payments. At 59 and 61, you and your husband will receive your pension at 67/68 Same as me and my husband in our 50s. We'll get more out than an under 30 is likely to, because the next significant change is not scheduled to happen until 2041.

Whilst it's possible we might experience a loss of triple lock, it's highly unlikely means testing will come into force before we claim, or that the age will rise to 70.

Whereas, somebody under 30 faces much less certainty that they will receive any state pension at all. That's the difference. You and I are working towards something that is now in our sights, continuing to pay for something we will take our turn at receiving.

Somebody under 30 isn't in that position. I am not saying, not have I ever said, that we shouldn't get our pensions or that we haven't worked and paid in. I am saying that we are now in a situation where the generations below us will be paying, just like we did, but are increasingly less likely to be receiving at any point shy of 70, if at all.

In all likelihood, many of them will still be working well after 65.

Yep so will you and I.

You are very optimistic

Meanwhile we have increasing numbers of people who aren't paying any income tax at all - 35% currently.
Take out those who are disabled and unable to work and that's a considerable portion of the country taking out but never paying in

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 16/11/2025 14:28

HelenaWaiting · 11/11/2025 21:39

You mean giving them loads of notice, expecting them to keep themselves informed and take appropriate action, and refusing to compensate them when they do nothing and later whine about it? They should get sweet FA.

This! It’s such bullshit.

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 14:31

Sexentric · 16/11/2025 13:48

@Scotiasdarling you obviously do believe its morally right and fair that the 'waspi' women - I assume you are one? - get a payout. Can I ask why? Or do you just think it will be a nice little windfall?

And why is that any of your business?

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 14:41

Ticklyoctopus · 16/11/2025 13:49

If it’s minor why did they need so much more notice?

Do keep up. The amount of compensation is minor, the change to the rules was major.

Digdongdoo · 16/11/2025 14:49

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 14:41

Do keep up. The amount of compensation is minor, the change to the rules was major.

If it's so minor, why do you need it?

Ticklyoctopus · 16/11/2025 14:57

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 14:31

And why is that any of your business?

Why wouldn’t it be? You’re the one who wants us to pay, and what’s more, you’re here insisting we do so despite the very good reasons not to.

OP posts:
Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 15:05

Digdongdoo · 16/11/2025 14:49

If it's so minor, why do you need it?

You and sextentric are a pair! Again, none of your business whether I need it or not.
If you have an argument make it, and I'll tell you where you're wrong. Who I am and my circumstances are irrelevant.

Digdongdoo · 16/11/2025 15:09

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 15:05

You and sextentric are a pair! Again, none of your business whether I need it or not.
If you have an argument make it, and I'll tell you where you're wrong. Who I am and my circumstances are irrelevant.

It's so odd to spend so long arguing your point, and then refuse to answer such a simple question.

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 15:14

Ticklyoctopus · 16/11/2025 14:57

Why wouldn’t it be? You’re the one who wants us to pay, and what’s more, you’re here insisting we do so despite the very good reasons not to.

Don't make things up. I have never insisted that you or anyone else should pay. Quote me if you can find me saying you should pay.

In fact I think it's vanishingly unlikely that anyone will pay, I only think that Parliament should do what they have been recommended to do.

I also suspect that if you are struggling with the cost of housing yourself you are not a net contributor and therefore it won't be you paying in any case.

ObelixtheGaul · 16/11/2025 15:15

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 14:25

In all likelihood, many of them will still be working well after 65.

Yep so will you and I.

You are very optimistic

Meanwhile we have increasing numbers of people who aren't paying any income tax at all - 35% currently.
Take out those who are disabled and unable to work and that's a considerable portion of the country taking out but never paying in

I will get my pension at 68. That isn't 'well after'.
And it's better than 'never'.

My point still stands. Why are we talking of paying compensation to a group who now have their triple-locked pensions which those coming up behind aren't even guaranteed to get at all.

A small percentage apparently didn't know. Plenty did, and have said they did, yet they will still get this payment. Some women were negatively affected, yes, but those who really weren't will still get the money.

The age of the youngest women in the WASPI group is 65. Just a few years older than you. So you will have experienced the same lack of work place pensions available to women, etc, yet you'll have to work even longer, from your post you don't feel certain about what will happen for your age group and yet you won't get compensation. I bet you never received a letter about the increase from 65 either. I know I haven't.

ObelixtheGaul · 16/11/2025 15:28

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 11:12

Well they didnt in 2011 !

Catastrophic economic disaster

We are in one now!!

Yes, they did, as was pointed out up thread, the changes were announced in 1995.

JassyRadlett · 16/11/2025 15:31

I also suspect that if you are struggling with the cost of housing yourself you are not a net contributor and therefore it won't be you paying in any case.

Tell me you're not from London or the South East without telling me etc etc.

ObelixtheGaul · 16/11/2025 15:31

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 15:14

Don't make things up. I have never insisted that you or anyone else should pay. Quote me if you can find me saying you should pay.

In fact I think it's vanishingly unlikely that anyone will pay, I only think that Parliament should do what they have been recommended to do.

I also suspect that if you are struggling with the cost of housing yourself you are not a net contributor and therefore it won't be you paying in any case.

My nephew is a net contributor in his early 30s. He has just managed to buy a one-bedroom ed flat. At his age, I had a three bedroomed house and neither husband nor I at that point were net contributors, though husband would later hit that bracket.

shineandsmile · 16/11/2025 15:35

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 15:14

Don't make things up. I have never insisted that you or anyone else should pay. Quote me if you can find me saying you should pay.

In fact I think it's vanishingly unlikely that anyone will pay, I only think that Parliament should do what they have been recommended to do.

I also suspect that if you are struggling with the cost of housing yourself you are not a net contributor and therefore it won't be you paying in any case.

The money would be coming from current taxpayers, where else do you think it would be coming from?

I can’t even begin to address your last point, you are very very out of touch.

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 15:45

ObelixtheGaul · 16/11/2025 15:28

Yes, they did, as was pointed out up thread, the changes were announced in 1995.

And accelerated in 2011 which is what the whole issue is about
Seriously do keep up

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 15:54

JassyRadlett · 16/11/2025 15:31

I also suspect that if you are struggling with the cost of housing yourself you are not a net contributor and therefore it won't be you paying in any case.

Tell me you're not from London or the South East without telling me etc etc.

You couldn't be more wrong.

mutinyonthetwix · 16/11/2025 15:55

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 15:45

And accelerated in 2011 which is what the whole issue is about
Seriously do keep up

Is that the whole issue? The 2011 change only affected women born between 6 April 1953 and 5th October 1954. But the WASPI website appears to be demanding compensation for women born 6th April 1950 to 5th April 1960.

Cheeseontoastghost · 16/11/2025 16:02

mutinyonthetwix · 16/11/2025 15:55

Is that the whole issue? The 2011 change only affected women born between 6 April 1953 and 5th October 1954. But the WASPI website appears to be demanding compensation for women born 6th April 1950 to 5th April 1960.

It was initially the 2011 issue but unfortunately others joined thinking they were hard done by.

I agree with 2011 group and the ruling against DWP relates to this.

Sexentric · 16/11/2025 16:57

Scotiasdarling · 16/11/2025 14:31

And why is that any of your business?

Well because you're arguing that we should pay up but dont seem to want to explain why. That would suggest that I'm right and you have no moral justification at all. You just see it as nice little earner that you're 'entitled' to. Nice.

Sexentric · 16/11/2025 16:58

Sexentric · 16/11/2025 16:57

Well because you're arguing that we should pay up but dont seem to want to explain why. That would suggest that I'm right and you have no moral justification at all. You just see it as nice little earner that you're 'entitled' to. Nice.

I hope you dont see a penny.

OneAmberFinch · 16/11/2025 17:03

JassyRadlett · 16/11/2025 15:31

I also suspect that if you are struggling with the cost of housing yourself you are not a net contributor and therefore it won't be you paying in any case.

Tell me you're not from London or the South East without telling me etc etc.

Quite! @Scotiasdarling this is what we mean when we talk about older generations having no idea of the struggles of the younger.

I have paid additional rate tax since my late 20s and am at this point far and away a net contributor even after one maternity leave. I pay over 3 grand a month, well over half of which is interest, for a 2 bed ex-council property an hour's commute away from my job in London. I am only able to do this because of my unusually high HHI, this very average area is totally out of reach for normal people and my neighbours are a mix of people who were gifted their £100k deposits, and council house residents.

No I don't enjoy subsidising various other random people @Cheeseontoastghost so stop bringing them up. But that doesn't mean I want to use any savings on WASPI women. I'd like a break for myself...