Unilever UK Pension Fund (PO-12808)
Complainant: Mr R
Complaint Topic: Other
Ref: PO-12808
Outcome: Not upheld
Appeal outcome: None
Respondent: Unilever UK Pensions Department
Type: Pension complaint or dispute
Date:
Appeal: No
Ombudsman’s Determination
Outcome
The complaint is not upheld because:
-
it has not been proven that the Guarantee has not been met; and
-
the Trustee of the Fund (the Trustee) can exercise its discretion whether to grant Mr R a pension from the Uniac Fund.
Complaint summary
Mr R’s complaint is two-fold. His first complaint concerns a guarantee he was given by Unilever, in 1978 (the Guarantee). He does not believe that Unilever is adhering to the Guarantee and as a result, he has incurred a financial loss.
His second complaint concerns the pension he has been granted from the Uniac Fund. He believes that he has been granted a pension from the Uniac Fund, contrary to the Uniac Fund’s Rules (the Uniac Rules).
View determination
DownloadRelated decisions
- Eleven Property Pension Scheme, SHK Property Services Pension, Gilbert Trading Pension Scheme (CAS-56320-R9K9, CAS-29144-G2B0, CAS-64379-Y9G6, CAS-82685-J8S7, CAS-84074-G0W5)Complainant: Ms Y, Mr S, Mr E, Mr Y, Mr GRespondent: Brambles Administration Limited (Brambles)
Mr Simon Hamilton Kaigh
Mr Michael McNally
Eleven Property Limited (Eleven Property)
SHK Property Services Limited (SHK Property Services)
Gilbert Trading Limited (Gilbert Trading)Outcome: UpheldComplaint Topic: OtherRef: CAS-56320-R9K9, CAS-29144-G2B0, CAS-64379-Y9G6, CAS-82685-J8S7, CAS-84074-G0W5Date: - Liverpool Victoria (LV=) SIPP (CAS-50479-K7G0)Complainant: Mr RRespondent: LV=Outcome: Not upheldComplaint Topic: OtherRef: CAS-50479-K7G0Date: