The Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 1992 (PO-25374)
I do not consider that the Fire and Rescue Service had an additional duty of care towards Mr E, other than the requirement to make factually correct information available to him. This is supported by relevant case law.
The complaint is upheld to the extent that the Fire and Rescue Service did not follow a reasonable process when exercising discretion under “rule K4” and making its decision to abate Mr E’s pension. My Directions are set out in paragraph 113 below.
Mr E's complaint concerns an overpayment of pension, amounting to £9,964, that the Fire and Rescue Service is seeking to recover following its decision to abate his pension. Specifically:-
- The Fire and Rescue Service had a duty of care to alert him at the outset that his pension would be abated.
- Invensys Pension Scheme (PO-28555)Complainant: Mr SRespondent: The Trustee of the Invensys Pension SchemeOutcome: Not upheldComplaint Topic: Benefits: overpayment (recovery of)Ref: PO-28555Date:
- Teachers' Pension Scheme (CAS-33273-M8R9)Complainant: Mr DRespondent: Teachers' PensionsOutcome: Not upheldComplaint Topic: Benefits: overpayment (recovery of)Ref: CAS-33273-M8R9Date: