Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Miss S’ complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, Dapa Coffee shall pay Miss S £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience she has experienced.  

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms D’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Administrator shall make good any financial loss it has caused Ms D. In addition, the Administrator shall pay Ms D £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience it has caused her.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr R’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay the missing contributions in respect of his pension and make good any shortfall in units. In addition, the Employer shall pay Mr R £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience it has caused him.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr M’s complaint against Fidelity is upheld. To put matters right, Fidelity shall pay £500 to Mr M for the significant distress and inconvenience the matter has caused him.  

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs D’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right MyCSP shall follow the directions set out in paragraph 39 below of this Determination. 

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is upheld against the Trustee and WTW because:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr R’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right James Hay shall: 

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Professor G has sustained injustice as a consequence of maladministration (involving infringements of various legal rights) by NHS BSA. 

NHS BSA:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is upheld against USS because it failed to provide sufficient and accurate information to Professor E, at the time he made his decision to opt for EOO, about the impact it would have on his entitlement to LRF. Consequently, he made an uninformed decision which has caused him an injustice.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is not upheld against Rowanmoor as Administrator, as it was not its responsibility to carry out the level of due diligence suggested by Mr N, and because it fulfilled the duties it did have in relation to the Scheme adequately.