On the go: The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has resumed its investigation into complaints about the state pension age rise for women, following the outcome of a judicial review last year.
In a post on its website, the ombudsman stated it was able to resume its consideration of complaints regarding changes in women’s state pension age, despite the application for appeal of the High Court case being ongoing.
BackTo60 and the Women Against State Pension Inequality group claim that when the 1995 Conservative government’s Pensions Act included plans to increase the women’s state pension age to 65 – the same as men’s – the changes were implemented unfairly, with little or no personal notice.
The movements also claim the changes were implemented faster than promised with the Pensions Act 2011, leaving women with no time to make alternative plans, leading to devastating consequences.
In October 2018, the parliamentary ombudsman announced it would investigate a sample of complaints brought to it about the Department for Work and Pensions and the Independent Case Examiner.
But in December 2018, PHSO suspended its investigation after it became apparent that the judicial review would consider the same issues.
In October last year, the High Court rejected claims that increasing the state pension age for women born in the 1950s discriminated against them on the grounds of age and sex, and that the government had failed to appropriately notify those affected of the changes.
The PHSO will now continue to look at the complaints, taking the High Court’s judgment into account. It has selected six complaints to act as lead cases to set a precedent for thousands of others.
According to the ombudsman, many complainants are seeking reinstatement of their state pension, the state pension age to revert to 60, and/or compensation for the amount of state pension they would have received had their state pension age not changed.
But the High Court decision has made clear that the ombudsman is not able to recommend that the DWP reimburse ‘lost’ pensions.
It also cannot recommend that anyone receives their state pension any earlier than the law allows, as to do so would in effect reverse or try to reverse the effect of primary legislation.
However, the PHSO may be able to offer compensation where it finds an injustice was suffered as a result of maladministration.
The investigation will address some issues that were not considered in the High Court, including the DWP and ICE’s complaint handling and the government’s communication of changes to national insurance contributions.
The ombudsman stated: “Our investigation looks at the issues from a different perspective. We are proposing to investigate whether there was maladministration, where an organisation does something wrong or provides poor service.”
This article originally appeared on ftadviser.com
