Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr L’s complaint against CMA 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) CMA shall pay Mr L £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

1. Miss A’s complaint against Capita, the Scheme administrator, and Wiltshire Police is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs E’s complaint against NHSBSA 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, NHSBSA shall make an award of £1,000 to Mrs E in respect of the serious non-financial injustice she has suffered.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs H’s complaint against ASPH and 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) ASPH shall pay Mrs H £2,000 and NHS BSA shall pay her £500 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its mishandling of her case.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint against Phoenix 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 shall pay Mr Y £500 compensation in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience which he has suffered dealing with this matter.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr D’s complaint against the Trustee 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) the Trustee shall pay Mr D £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused by its handling of his case.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr S says he was given a reasonable expectation that the Scheme would make up any shortfall required to provide his guaranteed minimum pension (GMP) (the Guarantee). He maintains that the Current Trustee is attempting to go back on the Guarantee and deny him his correct entitlement.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs J’s complaint against DWP and MyCSP 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, DWP should (1) provide MyCSP with correct and up to date information in relation to Mrs J’s Scheme membership, so that MyCSP can provide her with corrected statements and (2) pay Mrs J £1,000 in respect of the serious distress and inconvenience this matter has caused. MyCSP is not required to take further action.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint against Phoenix 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 shall pay Mr T £2,000 in recognition of the severe distress and inconvenience which he has experienced dealing with this matter.

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