Free bus pass eligibility is linked to State Pension age in England (Image: Getty)

Free bus pass eligibility for state pensioners across England will be hit with a new rule in October following a law change.

The State Pension age in the UK is currently rising from 66 to 67, with the change implemented in phases over a two-year period that began on April 6. The age increase is due to be completed in 2028, with the gradual implementation affecting anyone born after April 6, 1960. Older adults who have a 66th birthday within the transitional period will not officially reach State Pension age until they are 66 plus a specified number of months, depending on when their birthday falls. This delay not only affects when people become eligible to claim their State Pension, but it also impacts eligibility for other State Pension age-related benefits too – including a free bus pass in England.

As such, the age change delays the point at which older adults can claim their free bus pass, as the law means you’ll now need to be 66 plus a specified number of months, depending on your birth date, before you become entitled to your free pass.

If you live in a London borough, you can apply for a 60+ London Oyster photocard that allows you to travel free on bus, Tube, tram, DLR, London Overground and most National Rail lines in the capital. You’ll need to pay a £36 administration fee to set it up, plus an £18.50 annual address eligibility check fee for each year you have your photocard to keep it active, but once you reach State Pension age, you can then switch to the free Older Person’s Freedom Pass.

The Department for Transport (DfT) confirmed to The Express that eligibility for a free bus pass is changing in line with the State Pension age increase, with the next phase now underway this month, affecting anyone born between October 6, 1960, and November 5, 1960.

According to the DWP timetable, pensioners due to turn 66 between these dates face an extra seven-month wait before they can claim their State Pension, and in turn, their free bus pass.

For example, if you were born on October 6, 1960, the age increase means you will become eligible to claim both your State Pension and free bus pass on May 6, 2026, when you are exactly 66 years and seven months old.

A DfT spokesperson told The Express: “Eligibility for an older person’s bus pass under the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme is linked to State Pension age. This means eligibility will change in line with the increase in State Pension age from April.

“People born between 6 April 1960 and 5 March 1961 will qualify at 66 plus a specified number of months, depending on their date of birth.

“There is a tool to check the date people become eligible for a bus pass at Check your State Pension age – GOV.UK, by entering their date of birth.”

State Pension eligibility becomes further delayed the later in the year your 66th birthday falls, increasing by one month each time.

It means those turning 66 in the month from November 6 face an extra eight-month wait, while those turning 66 in the month from December 6 face an extra nine-month wait, and so on until the age rise to 67 is complete.

It means that some older people will be closer to age 66 when they get their free bus pass, while others will be only a month or two away from their 67th birthday by the time they become eligible. Anyone with a birthday after March 5, 1961, will be eligible for a free bus in England from age 67.

The DWP has confirmed the following timetable for the increase in State Pension age from 66 to 67, which shows when people with birthdays between April 6, 1960, and March 5, 1961 can claim their State Pension, and in turn, their free bus pass in England:

• April 6,1960 – May 5, 1960: 66 years and 1 month
• May 6, 1960 – June 5, 1960: 66 years and 2 months
  Article continues belowADVERTISEMENT
• June 6, 1960 – July 5, 1960: 66 years and 3 months
• July 6, 1960 – August 5, 1960: 66 years and 4 months
• August 6, 1960 – September 5, 1960: 66 years and 5 months
• September 6, 1960 – October 5, 1960: 66 years and 6 months
• October 6, 1960 – November 5, 1960: 66 years and 7 months
• November 6, 1960 – December 5, 1960: 66 years and 8 months
• December 6, 1960 – January 5, 1961: 66 years and 9 months
• January 6, 1961 – February 5, 1961: 66 years and 10 months
  Article continues belowADVERTISEMENT
• February 6, 1961 – March 5, 1961: 66 years and 11 months
• March 6, 1961 – April 5, 1977: 67 years

The DWP said: “The Pensions Act 2014 brought the increase in the State Pension age from 66 to 67 forward by eight years. The State Pension age for men and women will now increase to 67 between 2026 and 2028.

“The Government also changed the way in which the increase in State Pension age is phased so that rather than reaching State Pension age on a specific date, people born between 6 April 1960 and 5 March 1961 will reach their State Pension age at 66 years and the specified number of months.

” For people born after 5 April 1969 but before 6 April 1977, under the Pensions Act 2007, State Pension age was already 67.”

Meghan Just Got a Brutal Reminder She’s No Longer Relevant – It’s Humiliating

Meghan Markle has spent years at the centre of one of the most extraordinary celebrity stories in modern Britain.

Her departure from royal duties, move to the United States, media projects and increasingly independent public profile have ensured that she remains one of the most discussed members of the wider royal family.

But remaining famous is not necessarily the same thing as remaining influential.

That distinction lies behind a fresh wave of commentary about Meghan and the changing nature of public interest in her life.

For her critics, the latest developments are evidence that the intense fascination which once surrounded the Duchess of Sussex has begun to fade. Supporters, however, argue that Meghan has deliberately moved away from the British royal spotlight and is building a different kind of public identity on her own terms.

The question, therefore, is not simply whether Meghan remains relevant.

It is what kind of relevance she wants — and whether the public is still prepared to follow her there.

From royal newcomer to global celebrity

When Meghan married Prince Harry in 2018, global attention was enormous.

Her arrival in the Royal Family was initially presented as a symbol of modernisation. She was an American actress entering one of the world’s most famous institutions, and her background made her dramatically different from the traditional image of a British royal bride.

The wedding attracted millions of viewers around the world.

For a period, almost everything Meghan did generated headlines.

Her clothes became news.

Her speeches became news.

Her charitable activities became news.

Her relationship with other members of the Royal Family became news.

Even relatively ordinary public appearances could become international stories.

That level of attention created enormous expectations.

But it also created a problem.

Once someone has occupied the centre of the global media spotlight, almost anything less than that level of attention can look like a decline.

The Sussexes chose a different path

Meghan and Harry’s decision to step back from their roles as senior working royals fundamentally changed their relationship with the public.

They moved to North America and began developing commercial and media projects independently of the monarchy.

Their Netflix documentary generated huge attention.

Harry’s memoir became a global publishing event.

Interviews involving the couple produced intense debate about the Royal Family.

For several years, their story remained one of the most commercially powerful subjects in the celebrity and royal media.

But the media landscape does not remain static.

New stories arrive.

New celebrities emerge.

The public moves on.

And that is where the latest criticism of Meghan comes from.

Has the spotlight moved elsewhere?

One of the uncomfortable realities of modern celebrity culture is that attention is temporary.

Even extremely famous people can experience dramatic fluctuations in public interest.

Meghan is not unique in that respect.

The Royal Family itself has also experienced major changes since she left Britain.

King Charles III is now firmly established as monarch.

Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales, occupy a central position in the future of the institution.

Prince Harry and Meghan are no longer part of the daily machinery of the monarchy.

That means the British public does not necessarily encounter them through official royal events in the way it once did.

The result is a different relationship.

Instead of appearing because the institution requires them to appear, Meghan’s public presence increasingly depends on projects, media coverage, commercial ventures and personal initiatives.

That creates a much more competitive environment.

She is no longer competing simply for attention within the Royal Family.

She is competing for attention with the entire global entertainment industry.

The relevance debate

Critics frequently use the word “irrelevant” when discussing celebrities whose media profile appears to have declined.

But that word can be misleading.

Meghan remains internationally recognisable.

Her name can still generate headlines.

Her marriage to Prince Harry continues to attract enormous interest.

She has millions of followers across social media and remains a subject of intense discussion in the British and American press.

So saying that she has become completely irrelevant would be difficult to substantiate.

The more interesting question is whether she still possesses the extraordinary cultural influence she enjoyed immediately after marrying into the Royal Family.

That is a different proposition.

And there are reasonable grounds for arguing that the environment has changed.

Her new brand faces a different test

Meghan has increasingly sought to establish a personal brand separate from her royal identity.

Her lifestyle projects, commercial partnerships and media work are part of that strategy.

This approach offers her something the Royal Family could never provide: greater control.

She can decide what subjects she wants to discuss.

She can choose how she presents herself.

She can work with commercial partners.

She can build projects around her personal interests.

But independence comes with a price.

Inside the Royal Family, attention was effectively built into the institution.

Outside it, attention must be earned repeatedly.

A royal engagement automatically attracts journalists.

A new business project does not necessarily do so.

A royal statement becomes international news.

A lifestyle announcement competes with thousands of other celebrity stories.

That is the fundamental difference.

The Meghan paradox

There is a striking paradox at the heart of Meghan’s public life.

The very institution she left is part of the reason she remains so famous.

Her identity as the Duchess of Sussex continues to provide enormous recognition.

At the same time, her decision to leave royal duties means she cannot rely on the monarchy to provide the same platform indefinitely.

This creates a delicate balancing act.

If she speaks extensively about royal life, critics accuse her of exploiting a connection she rejected.

If she avoids the Royal Family completely, her independent projects must stand on their own.

Either way, the monarchy remains part of the conversation.

That is perhaps the most difficult part of becoming independent from a globally recognised institution.

The public is changing too

There is another factor that should not be ignored.

The British public’s relationship with the monarchy has evolved considerably.

Royal coverage remains popular, but audiences are increasingly fragmented.

People receive news through TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, podcasts, streaming services and online publications.

The days when a handful of newspapers and television programmes could determine the national conversation are disappearing.

This creates opportunities for Meghan.

She can communicate directly with audiences without depending entirely on traditional media.

But it also makes the competition for attention much tougher.

There are thousands of influencers, actors, entrepreneurs and celebrities trying to occupy the same digital space.

Being famous is no longer enough.

People want constant content.

Supporters see something completely different

Meghan’s supporters would reject the idea that she is desperately trying to remain relevant.

They would argue that she has deliberately chosen a quieter and more independent life.

From that perspective, the reduction in royal appearances is not a humiliation.

It is the consequence of a decision.

The Sussexes have repeatedly sought to establish lives outside the traditional royal structure, and Meghan’s supporters argue that success should therefore be measured by her own projects rather than by the number of front-page stories she generates.

That is an important counterargument.

Public visibility and personal success are not necessarily the same thing.

A person can become less visible in the tabloids while becoming more successful in business.

Equally, a celebrity can dominate headlines without building a sustainable career.

Why the criticism remains powerful

Nevertheless, the “relevance” criticism persists because Meghan’s public story was originally built around extraordinary levels of visibility.

Her entrance into the Royal Family created a media phenomenon.

Her departure created another.

The Oprah interview created another.

Harry’s memoir created another.

Each stage produced huge attention.

The challenge now is different.

There are fewer dramatic chapters in the royal story involving Meghan.

That means the next phase of her career must increasingly stand on its own.

The public may eventually judge her not by her relationship with the Royal Family, but by what she creates independently.

That could ultimately be a more demanding test.

A different definition of success

Calling Meghan “irrelevant” may make for a striking headline, but it oversimplifies a much more complicated reality.

She is still a globally recognised public figure.

She still attracts enormous media attention.

She still has access to platforms that most people could never obtain.

What has changed is the source of that attention.

The royal institution is no longer providing her with a permanent stream of official engagements and ceremonial visibility.

Her future profile will depend increasingly on her own choices.

That may be uncomfortable for critics who believe her celebrity has declined.

But it could also be liberating for Meghan herself.

The real test is whether she can create something that commands attention without the monarchy being at the centre of the story.

If she can, the claims that she has become irrelevant will look increasingly dated.

If she cannot, the criticism will become harder to dismiss.

Either way, one thing is clear: Meghan’s next chapter cannot simply depend on replaying the drama of the past.

The era when every royal appearance automatically became a global event has changed.

Now the Duchess of Sussex has to compete in a far bigger arena — one where fame may open the door, but sustained public interest has to be earned again and again.