Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I agree that part, but not all, of this complaint should be upheld. To put matters right for the part that should be upheld, the Trustee shall pay Mr S £1,000 to recognise the serious distress and inconvenience caused to him.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’ complaint against Veterans UK 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, Veterans UK shall pay Mr S £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience he has suffered.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I agree that part, but not all, of this complaint should be upheld. To put matters right for the part that should be upheld, NHS BSA shall pay £500 to Mr H, in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience it has caused.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Professor I’s complaint against USS Ltd 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) USS Ltd shall pay Professor I £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused by providing him with incorrect retirement quotations and information relating to his pensionable pay and pensionable service.

Complaint summary

Professor I’s complaints are:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint is partly upheld, but there is a part that I do not agree with. To put matters right, for the part that is upheld, the JAC shall pay £205.75 to Mr N’s CSPP with Legal & General. JAC shall also pay £500 to Mr N in acknowledgement of the significant distress and inconvenience he has experienced.

Complaint Summary

Mr N’s Complaint is that JAC failed to pay pension contributions to his CSPP between February and October 2017.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs S’ complaint against Aviva 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), Aviva shall pay £100 to Mrs S for the loss of interest on the initial contribution of £4,000 and reimburse any non-refundable expenditure that Mrs S has incurred as a result of Aviva’s maladministration.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint against TP and the University 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 University should pay Mr Y £1,000 for the severe distress and inconvenience caused to him by its mishandling of his case.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr L’s complaint against Aviva 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) Aviva should pay Mr L £600 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs Y’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 shall pay Mrs Y £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience caused to her by its mishandling of her case.

Complaint summary

Mrs Y’s complaint concerns NHS BSA’s decision to refuse her application for ill health early retirement (IHER) as an active Scheme member and its delay in dealing with her application.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint against Hartley 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), Hartley shall pay Mr T £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience he has experienced.