WASPI 'one-month' update over key date in legal dispute for compensation

WASPI campaigners are getting ready for a major legal battle in their fight for DWP compensation. A judicial review will take place at the high court in December as the WASPI (Women Against State Pension Inequality) campaign seeks to overturn a DWP decision not to grant them payouts.

The Government announced at the end of last year there would be no compensation for the 1950s-born women represented by WASPI and other campaign groups. Now the campaigners are getting ready to present their case for this decision to be ruled out at the high court.

Their case will be heard on December 9 and 10. A public fundraiser for WASPI's legal fees has raised more than £250,000 to date.

What is the WASPI dispute about?

WASPI represents the generation of women born in the 1950s who were impacted when their state pension age rose from 60 to 65 and then 66. They claim they were not properly notified of the change by the DWP, with many of the women still unaware right up to the last minute, ruining their retirement plans.

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigated the matter, finding that there were major mistakes by the DWP, as they should have sent out letters to the women sooner. The group said the Government should pay the women between £1,000 and £2,950, and urged for Parliament to take up the matter.

But Labour ministers announced last year that there would be no compensation for the women. The Government argued that most women did know of the change and that sending out letters sooner would have made little difference.

Now WASPI are seeking to get this decision overturned at the high court. Even if the decision is overturned, this does not guarantee compensation for the women.

WASPI campaign chair Angela Madden spoke about whether the DWP could issue a fresh decision not to grant compensation, with different reasons. She said: "They certainly can't use the same reasons from before because those reasons will have been deemed as unlawful.

"They can't just do it again. But they could review the report yet again and come up with something completely different." A DWP spokesperson said previously about the judicial review: "We do not comment on live litigation.

"We accept the Ombudsman's finding of maladministration and have apologised for there being a 28-month delay in writing to 1950s-born women. However, we do not agree with the Ombudsman's approach to injustice or remedy and that is why we have decided not to pay compensation."