Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’s complaint and no further action is required by NYPF.

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

Complaint summary

Mr N is complaining that NYPF provided an incorrect early retirement estimate on the online pension calculator in December 2015. He is asking NYPF to pay him an amount to recognise the distress its error caused him.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’s complaint and no further action is required by Friends Life

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y has complained that Friends Life are insisting that he takes independent financial advice before he can withdraw all his pension benefits, from the Plan.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr R’s complaint and no further action is required by Nomenca / NM Group.

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

Complaint summary

Mr R’s complaint is that Nomenca / NM Group has refused to make up the shortfall in his pension on retirement, following the transfer of his employment under the TUPE Regulations.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustees.

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

Complaint summary

Mr N contends that his statement of benefits on leaving employment was legally binding and the Trustees are obliged to honour the figures shown on the statement, backdating any missed payments to date.

Ombudsman’s Determination

I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint and no further action is required by Cornhill.Outcome

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustees.

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y’s complaint arises because the Trustees rejected his application to access his Scheme pension before his Normal Pension Age (NPA) at “preferential”, rather than cost-neutral, reduction factors.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Professor N’s complaint and no further action is required by USS.

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

Complaint summary

Professor N’s complaint is that USS failed to provide her with adequate information regarding the Scheme Pays facility, including that there was a deadline by when the election for Scheme Pays for tax year 2013/14 had to be received by USS.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr D’s complaint and no further action is required by the Government Actuary’s Department.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

I do not uphold Mrs E’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trust.Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mrs E complains that the Trust failed to inform her at the time she entered into the added years contract that the extra membership which she was purchasing of 3 years 61 days would be insufficient to achieve her aim of 40 years’ total pensionable service in the Scheme on reaching age 60 in August 2015.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’s complaint and no further action is required by Countrywide.

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y made a complaint in three parts following the full surrender of his policies in the Scheme. He said: