Peter and Flo Fanning hoped to restore winter fuel payments

Glasgow Times

13-06-2025

Pensioners Peter and Flo Fanning took their case to the Court of Session in Edinburgh, claiming that both sets of decision-makers failed to consult pensioners and did not release an equality impact assessment on the changes.
The Court of Session ruled to refuse the petition on Friday morning.
Peter and Flo lost their entitlement to the financial assistance and became worried about their ability to afford their heating costs.
Peter, 73, receives a state and a work pension, while Flo, 72, receives just a state pension.
They do not meet the criteria to qualify for pension credits and decided to take action in a bid to have the benefit restored for all who previously received it.
Peter said he was going to court to "give a voice" to other pensioners.
The couple both suffer from medical conditions that are made worse by the cold. During the winter, they say they have to use their household heating daily to combat symptoms.
Peter and Flo Fanning (Image: PA) They also claimed the decision to end the £300 benefit for thousands of people across the country last year was "irrational" and breached their human rights.
READ NEXT: Two Coatbridge pensioners 'intend to sue' Scottish Government
Lady Hood found that neither of the governments had failed to exercise their duties under the Equality Act 2010 and neither was under a duty to consult.
In her judgment, she stated: 'This case is not a verdict, nor even an expression of opinion, on the merits or demerits of government policy as debated in the public arena.
'The purpose of the case was to test a much "narrower question", namely whether the policy decisions made by the governments were unlawful, and if so liable to be struck down by the courts.
'I shall therefore repel the petitioners' first to eighth pleas-in-law and refuse the petition. The question of the appropriate remedies, had I found in the petitioners' favour therefore does not arise.'
Late Alba Party leader Alex Salmond was instrumental in putting the Fannings in touch with the Govan Law Centre ahead of the action being raised.
A spokesperson from Govan Law Centre, who represented the couple, said they still felt the action had been merited and worthwhile.
They added: "While our clients have lost their case at first instance, we have no doubt that this litigation has been influential in securing the partial U-turn made by the Scottish Government last November and the major policy U-turn confirmed by the UK Government earlier this week.
"We hope that Holyrood will now follow suit and restore the winter fuel payment in full for people such as our clients."
Westminster abandoned plans to withdraw the payments from all but the poorest pensioners after the scheme drew widespread criticism.
The Scottish Government had already launched its own winter fuel benefit in response to the original cut, which included extra support for those less well-off, but also a universal payment which is unaffected by income.