Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs M’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right TP shall pay Mrs M the maximum lump sum she would have received if she had been allowed to make that choice in January 2016; plus £500 for distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs M’s complaint is that she has not been paid maximum tax free cash.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mrs T complains that NHSBSA incorrectly decided not to award her Mental Health Officer (MHO) status for parts of her NHS service because the criteria upon which their decision was made are “unclear, unfair, confusing and contradictory”. She considers that she should have been awarded MHO status because:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Mrs N’s questions regarding the status and security of the Plan, including the current value, and assist her in exercising her statutory right to a transfer if she so wishes.

Fast Pensions should also pay Mrs N, £1,000, to reflect the significant distress and inconvenience caused to her by their maladministration.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Curtis Banks and Fidelity should:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms T complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Ms T’s questions regarding the status and security of the Plan, including the current value, and assist her in exercising her statutory right to a transfer if she so wishes.

Fast Pensions should also pay Ms T, £1,000, to reflect the significant distress and inconvenience caused to her by their maladministration.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs I’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right within 21 days NOW: Pensions are to:

• Provide Mrs I with a correct benefit statement showing that all missing contributions have been paid into the Plan;
• Calculate and pay into the Plan any loss of investment growth that Mrs I has suffered for the funds not being in her pension; and
• Pay Mrs I £500 for the distress and inconvenience she has suffered.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs A’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right Prudential should provide a personal pension plan for her, containing the appropriate amount of money.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs A has complained that neither the PCSPS nor Prudential is accepting responsibility to provide her with pension benefits which in 1990 she requested to be transferred from the PCSPS to Prudential.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Coker Engineering’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right within the next 21 days NOW: Pensions need to:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr E complaint is upheld and to put matters right BT should review the matter again in light of my comments within this Determination.

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

Complaint summary

Mr E complains that BT, his former employer, refused to award him BT’s medical retirement benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs B’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Barclays shall consider again whether Mrs B satisfied the criteria for ill health retirement at the date her employment was terminated and pay Mrs B £500 for distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs B’s complaint is that she has been refused ill health retirement from the date her employment ended.