Subject

In 1996 Mr Cunningham began making additional contributions from his salary to purchase nine additional years in the Plan. In 2000 he transferred to another employer in the group without a break in pensionable service. However, when his payroll record was set up at his new employer they did not arrange for the deduction of the additional service contributions.

Complaint summary

Dr Baldwin has complained that he was provided with incorrect information and that he relied on the misinformation when deciding to retire. Had he known his actual pension entitlement was lower than stated, he would have continued to work and would not have triggered his pension until August 2013.

He says that his claim is for negligence and negligent misrepresentation.

He is seeking compensation for loss of income, loss of pension entitlement and for the distress and inconvenience caused by the maladministration in this matter.

Complaint summary

Ms P Lettman has complained about the death benefits payable from the LGPS in respect of her late son, Mr K R Lettman, being subject to a 40% tax charge as an unauthorised payment, due to not settling the death benefit within two years.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against LBHF and to a lesser extent LPFA because:

Complaint summary

Mrs K has complained that the method by which TP has calculated her retirement benefits has resulted in a pension and lump sum lower than she had planned and was expecting.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint is upheld against DfE and TP because Mrs K was given misleading information when she asked about the calculation of her pension which she relied on to her detriment. Mrs K was also misinformed about the reason for the change in the calculations which led to a delay in finalising her complaint.

Complaint summary

Ms V’s complaint is about AJ Bell’s decision not to award her any death benefits under their discretionary powers in respect of Mr Philip Scott’s Self Invested Personal Pension (SIPP).

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against AJ Bell because their decision not to exercise their discretion in Ms V’s favour was flawed.

Ombudsman Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right Hargreaves Lansdown should review again its decision to pay all the lump sum death benefits to Miss A and none to Mrs N.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

Mr Y’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Friends Life should pay Mr Y financial compensation for the loss he has suffered and the distress and inconvenience caused by its error.

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y’s complaint is summarised as follows:

Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

Mr L’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Committee should pay Mr L £750 for distress and inconvenience caused plus simple interest on the incapacity benefits that would have been payable in June 2014.

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

Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

Miss A’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right MoJ should consider the matter again and provide Miss A with a detailed explanation regarding her application for  early release of her deferred pension on grounds of compassion. Further in recognition of the distress and inconvenience Miss A has experienced, MoJ will pay her compensation of £500.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Littlebrook should pay £4,201.36 into the pension plan.

Littlebrook should also pay £1000 to Mr Y as compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused.

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