Skip to main content
Complainant: Mr S
Complaint Topic: Interpretation of scheme rules/policy terms
Ref: PO-28652
Outcome: Not upheld
Appeal outcome: None
Respondent: Namulas Pension Trustees Limited
Type: Pension complaint or dispute
Date:
Appeal: No

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by Namulas. 

Complaint summary

Mr S complains that:- 

  • Namulas has been unable to confirm which Trust Deed and Rules (the Rules) are in force for the SIPP. 

  • Namulas has unilaterally changed the Rules. In particular, Mr S can no longer borrow against the SIPP or use an overdraft facility. In addition, Namulas is now able to force a sale of the SIPP’s asset, in order to pay its own fees. 

  • The SIPP asset has lost value. In particular, Namulas has tried to force a sale below market value. 

  • The SIPP fees are unreasonable. In particular, the SIPP asset was mis-sold to Mr S, as he was not made aware of the fees that would be applicable before he made the investment. He has also not been receiving a pension from the SIPP as Namulas has ceased collecting rent from the tenant. 

  • Namulas failed to carry out sufficient due diligence on the suitability of the SIPP when it commenced, and when the property was purchased in 2005. 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

  • Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (CAS-43767-M3K0)
    Complainant: Mr Y
    Respondent: Scottish Prison Service
    The Cabinet Office
    Outcome: Not upheld
    Complaint Topic: Interpretation of scheme rules/policy terms
    Ref: CAS-43767-M3K0
    Date:
  • Local Government Pension Scheme (PO-14629)
    Complainant: Mr N
    Respondent: City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council
    Outcome: Partly upheld
    Complaint Topic: Interpretation of scheme rules/policy terms
    Ref: PO-14629
    Date: