WASPI update as campaigners face 'waiting game' for judicial review

WASPI campaigners (Women Against State Pension Inequality) are continuing to push for compensation as they now await a decision on their application for a judicial review.

They hope the review will overturn the DWP's decision at the end of last year, when ministers said there would be no compensation payouts for the women.

The WASPI women claim that the 1950s-born generation of women they represent were not properly informed by the DWP that their state pension age would increase from 60 to 65 and 66, with many unaware of the major change, ruining their retirement plans.

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman looked into the case and found that there was 'maladministration' in the DWP's efforts to tell the women, saying an important letter should have been sent out sooner. The Ombudsman recommended payouts ranging from £1,000 to £2,950.

But the DWP disregarded this ruling, arguing most of the women knew of the change and that it would have made little difference to send out the letter sooner.

With the latest legal bid, lawyers for both the WASPI campaign and the DWP have filed their papers outlining their case. WASPI campaign chair, Angela Madden, explained what happens next.

She said: "All the papers now will go forwards to a judge who will decide whether there's an arguable case or not. That's the next step.

"We don't see there being any problems with that but unfortunately we don't know when that will be. It's a waiting game, there isn't really a schedule for it. Like everything else, I think the courts are backed up with other cases."

In outlining its case for the judicial review, the said: "The question whether an earlier letter would have had any effect on complainants' state of knowledge was clearly material to the extent of any injustice they had suffered as a result of maladministration, when the identified maladministration was, precisely, the failure to send letters earlier.

"At the very least, the SSWP (Secretary of State for Work and Pensions) was certainly entitled so to conclude. The SSWP consequently rejected the approach taken by the PHSO, which she considered assessed injustice on a false premise."

Ms Madden said the arguments the DWP had set out were very much what they expected. She said: "They are going to fight us all the way,we knew that.

"They have done ever since we started these complaints eight years ago. It is just as we expected really."

But Ms Madden said she think the Ombudsman's position was "stronger" than the stance the has chosen to take.

She said: "Of course, it's the Ombudsman's job to investigate. The really are marking their own homework in saying we don't need to do what the Ombudsman says because we did our job well enough so that you already knew.

"Our lived experience is that we didn't know. The Ombudsman's investigation led to us not knowing as well. We'll just have to see what the courts say now."

Many individual MPs support the WASPI cause with some political parties also calling for compensation, including the Liberal Democrats and the SNP.

Ms Madden said they are continuing their work raising the issue in Parliament: "We're carrying on meet with MPs and have seen a few in recent weeks and months. I think those who spoke out in the debates will keep speaking out on our behalf.

"Some have gone quiet. I think it must be more difficult for the newer Labour MPs, who thought that supporting the WASPI cause was part of their party's raison d'etre. They must be quite confused at the moment."

The DWP said previously after serving its documents for 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."