Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms S’ complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Council should consider whether Ms S satisfied the criteria for the early release of her deferred pension on grounds of ill health before 16 August 2016 and pay Ms S £1,500 for the distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Complaint summary

Ms S’ complaint is that she has not been awarded the early release of her deferred pension on the grounds of ill health.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr D’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Council shall reconsider Mr D’s application for an ill health retirement (IHRP).

The Council shall pay Mr D £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused by its actions.

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

Complaint summary

Mr D’s complaint concerns the Council’s decision not to award him an IHRP from deferred status.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Dr S’ complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Trustee should enhance Dr S’ pension with St James’ Place (SJP) and, it should also pay Dr S compensation for the distress and inconvenience this situation has caused him.

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

Complaint summary

Dr S has complained because he is unhappy with the way that the Trustee has calculated the shortfall of the transfer value of the pension he had in the Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr G has complained that USS refused to award him ill health retirement benefits.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint is upheld against USS because it has not interpreted the Scheme Rules correctly when considering Mr G’s application for ill health retirement benefits. There is no finding of maladministration against the University, so the complaint against it is not upheld.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs R’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right, Hedingham School shall:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Dr I has complained that that he was not informed that an actuarial reduction would be applied to the added years’ element of his Scheme pension, prior to him applying to take his benefits. He has also complained that he was incorrectly told, in March 2016, that his application could not be withdrawn although he had not yet begun to receive the benefits.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against NHSBSA because:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs Y’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right USS Ltd shall review its decision to pay her Total Incapacity benefits from 25 April 2017. It shall also pay Mrs Y £500 for distress and inconvenience.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs Y has complained that her application for incapacity retirement has not been dealt with in a proper manner.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr T has complained that HMRC made several mistakes calculating his pension benefits, causing him to suffer significant distress and inconvenience.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against HMRC because there were several instances of maladministration, and I am satisfied that this caused Mr T to suffer significant distress and inconvenience.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr N’s complaint is that Capita and D&CP led him to believe that he was purchasing additional service which would bring forward his retirement date to an earlier date of 4 July 2017.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against Capita only because it misinformed Mr N about the way the purchase would operate. Mr N relied on this misinformation to make the decision to buy added years in the Scheme with a lump sum payment.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr L has complained that Mr Mirza and/or Blacksey Limited failed to set up a pension scheme following his transfer of employment to them under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI2006/246) (TUPE 2006).