WASPI campaigners to gather outside royal courts as fight for compensation ramps up

campaigners will gather outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Monday as they ramp up their efforts to secure compensation for women impacted by changes to the age. The group is seeking a judicial review to challenge the Government’s decision not to offer compensation for how these changes were communicated.

A report from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PSHO) recommended compensation of between £1,000 and £2,950 for each woman affected. In December 2024, the Government accepted the ombudsman’s finding of maladministration and apologised for delays in notifying women born in the 1950s. Despite this, it argued that a blanket compensation scheme, which could cost taxpayers up to £10.5 billion, could not be justified.

In response, WASPI campaigners have raised over £150,000 in recent weeks to fund their High Court challenge.

WASPI chair Angela Madden said: “We do not want to be taking legal action, but we have been forced to due to the Government’s total denial of justice.”

Lawyers for the group argue that the Government’s refusal to offer compensation breaches legal principles.

WASPI confirmed that their legal representative, Bindmans, has sent a letter before action, and judicial review papers are being filed. An initial court hearing is expected in the near future.

Angela Madden added: “The Government has an opportunity now to get around the table and engage meaningfully with us. If they don’t, they will have to continue to defend the indefensible, but this time in front of senior judges.”

A Government spokesperson said: “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, evidence showed only one in four people remember reading and receiving letters that they weren’t expecting and that by 2006, 90% of 1950s-born women knew that the age was changing.

“The Government cannot justify paying for a £10.5 billion compensation scheme at the expense of the taxpayer.”