Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs W’s complaint against CPF is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right (for the part that is upheld) CPF should pay Mrs W £500.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs T’s complaint against Surrey County Council is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right (for the part that is upheld) Surrey County Council should pay Mrs T £500 for distress and inconvenience.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs T has complained that her eligibility for ill health retirement benefits has not been properly assessed.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I uphold part of Mr E’s complaint but there is a part which I do not agree with.

The Trustees shall pay Mr E £750 in respect of the significant distress and inconvenience he has suffered.

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

Complaint summary

Mr E is unhappy that the Trustees will not pay him an unreduced pension from age 50.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr R has complained that the overtime pay he received from Wetton should have been included in his pensionable pay for the purpose of calculating his retirement benefits under the Scheme, and that Wetton and Capita caused delays in providing relevant information.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be partly upheld against Wetton because:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint against James Hay and Phoenix Life is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right, for the part that is upheld, Phoenix Life shall pay into Mr T’s new pension arrangement redress in respect of any loss incurred by its actions. Phoenix Life shall also pay £500 to Mr T in respect of the significant distress and inconvenience he has suffered.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint against JLT is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right, for the part that is upheld, JLT should pay Mr N £1,000 for the very significant distress and inconvenience caused.

The complaint against the Trustee is not upheld.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr E’s complaint against Liberty SIPP is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right, for the part that is upheld, Liberty SIPP shall take whatever action is necessary to resolve the conflict of interest that has arisen.  It shall also pay Mr E £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience he has suffered.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms E’s complaint against NHS BSA is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right (for the part that is upheld) NHS BSA should pay Ms E £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience she has suffered.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint against AT is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right for the part that is upheld AT should pay Mrs N a total of £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs N has complained that AT has unduly delayed her transfer.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr G’s complaint against the respondents is in three main parts:-

The provision of incorrect information and delays caused by the Administrator in relation to both sections of the Scheme.

Delays in the transfer of his benefits, from the defined contribution section of the Scheme, to a separate scheme with Legal & General.