Skip to main content

Central Bureau for Educational Visits and Exchanges Pension Scheme (PO-11271)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Ms E has complained that the Trustees and BC have unjustly stepped back from their historic practice of revaluing deferred benefits by 5% per annum.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be partly upheld against the Trustees and BC because:

View determination

Download

Related decisions

The Central Bureau for Educational Visits and Exchanges Pension Scheme
(PO-13565)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Ms H has complained that the Trustees and BC have unjustly stepped back from their historic practice of revaluing deferred benefits by 5% per annum.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be partly upheld against the Trustees and BC because:

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Central Bureau for Educational Visits and Exchanges Pension Scheme (PO-14290)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Ms K has complained that the Trustees and BC have unjustly stepped back from their historic practice of revaluing deferred benefits by 5% per annum.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be partly upheld against the Trustees and BC because:

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Railways Pension Scheme East Coast Main Line Section (PO-22071)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint against Railways Pension Scheme is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right the Scheme shall award Mr Y £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience caused.

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

The Rolls-Royce Pension Fund (PO-26634)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’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 should pay Mr Y a total of £500 in respect of the significant distress and inconvenience which he has suffered, m which includes the £250 already offered.

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr D’s complaint against TP 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, TP shall pay Mr D £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience he has suffered.

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

Complaint summary

Mr D has complained that funds from his late father’s pension were paid in full to his sister although he was a joint executor to the estate.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Deloitte UK Pension Scheme (PO-20485)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr K’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 should pay Mr K, £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience this situation has caused him.

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

Complaint summary

Mr K’s complaint concerns the Trustee’s decision not to increase his deferred benefits by 50%.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Teachers’ Pensions Scheme (PO-25588)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’ complaint against TP 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), TP shall pay Mr S £500, in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S’ complaint is that TP has unfairly deprived him of a spouse’s pension from the Scheme, under regulations that applied to his late wife, Mrs S, from 6 April 1988.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

The Universities Superannuation Scheme (PO-20908)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Miss N’s complaint against the USS Trustee and the University is partly upheld in respect of the University but not the USS Trustee; however, there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right for the part that is upheld, the University shall pay Miss N £500 in respect of significant distress, including loss of opportunity and loss of expectation.

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms T’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 should make an award to Ms T in respect of the serious non-financial injustice caused to her.

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Subscribe to Partly upheld