Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint against the 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) the Council shall pay Mrs N £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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 £1,000 for the significant distress and inconvenience that it has caused him.

Complaint summary

Mr S complains that TP poorly handled his request to convert his Accrued Incapacity Benefits (AIB) to Total Incapacity Benefits (TIB).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr L’s complaint against the Trustee.

Mr L’s complaint against the Company 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 Company will pay £500 to Mr L to recognise the significant distress and inconvenience it has caused him.

Complaint summary

Mr L’s complaint is that the Company did not permit him to take an unreduced Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’ complaint against the Trustees is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not uphold. To put matters right (for the part which is upheld), the Trustees shall review their decision not to waive the early payment reduction in Mr S’ case.

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that the Trustees have declined to pay his deferred pension early on the grounds of ill health. He has also complained that the Trustees have not “inflation-proofed” his Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs K’s complaint 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) within 21 days of the date of this Determination, the Trustee shall pay £1,000 to Mrs K, in recognition of the serious distress and inconvenience caused by HSBC A & C Ltd.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Dr 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 shall award interest on the refund of contributions, and pay £2,000 to Dr E for the severe distress and inconvenience its error has caused him.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr D’s complaint is partly upheld and as WTW and the Trustee of the Scheme (the Trustee) have already adequately tried to put matters right for Mr D, during the Adjudicator’s investigation, no further action is required on WTW’s part.

Complaint summary

Mr D complains that WTW, the administrator of the Scheme, failed to provide complete, clear and consistent information, about the benefits available to him from the defined contribution (DC) section of the Scheme in a timely fashion.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr D has complained that OMW would not pay his remaining tax-free cash lump sum (TFC) and pension by electronic bank transfer to his Australian bank account or to a UK bank account he later opened.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I partly uphold Mr S’ complaint in respect of the non-financial injustice which Mr S has suffered. I do not find that Mr S has suffered a financial loss from the negligent misstatement made to him.

Complaint summary

Mr S’ complaint against the Administrator and the Employer is about a large difference between the estimated pension figures he received for immediate payment in December 2013 and the estimated figures for deferred payment in April 2016.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr G’s complaint is that the Employer and Trustee have calculated his pension benefits incorrectly; Mr G seeks their recalculation from 2015 to date. Mr G says that the Employer and the Trustee have incorrectly applied a pension cap of £36,000 to both his basic salary and bonuses, rather than applying the pension cap to his bonuses only. The effect of this approach is that his bonuses have been excluded from the calculation of his pension benefits.