Hays Pension Scheme (PO-12366)

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr K’s complaint and no further action is required by Equiniti or Hays.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mr K is unhappy because an early retirement factor (ERF) has been applied to part of his benefits under the Scheme. As a result, those benefits have been reduced.

Mr K was an active member of the Scheme from July 1991 to May 2004. After May 2004, Mr K was employed elsewhere and he became a deferred member until he transferred his benefits out of the Scheme in 2016. Between July 1991 and December 1996, Mr K was part of the Scheme’s Guildford Category, which had a normal retirement age (NRA) of 62. After January 1997, Mr K was promoted and subsequently became a member of the Scheme’s Senior Management Category and later the Executive Category. Both categories had an NRA of 60.

Mr K states it was agreed, at a trustee meeting in September 1998, that if a promoted member retires at NRA for his current category, an ERF would not be applied to any of his benefits. This would be the case, even for those benefits the member had accrued in relation to a category with an NRA which had not yet been reached.

Mr K was a promoted member and as such he believes his benefits have been incorrectly reduced.

Hays is the trustee for the Scheme, but has delegated responsibility for the administration of it to Equiniti. For this reason, Mr K’s complaint is against both Hays and Equiniti. However, Hays has responded to the complaint on behalf of both itself and Equiniti, and as such only Hays has been referred to below.