Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by the Trustees of the Frederic R Harris Retirement & Death Benefits Scheme.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that the Trustees have informed him that he has been overpaid pension benefits and they are seeking to recover the overpayment.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N is complaining that after consulting with TP he was told, on two occasions that although his ill-health pension would continue to be paid, if he took the employment positions he was considering, it would mean his Total Incapacity Benefit (TIB) would cease.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr D’s complaint and no further action is required by PP.com.

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

Complaint summary

Mr D has complained that PP.com did not carry out sufficient due diligence to prevent the loss of his pension fund assets.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N retired on ill-health grounds, and says he was assured that his pension would be enhanced up to the age of 60. But, when he received the relevant documentation he found he was not entitled to an enhancement.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Professor M’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustee.

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

Complaint summary

Professor M’s complaint is about the changes to the actuarial assumptions and factors used in the calculation of a 1% pension share for his ex-wife. He says that the Trustee has not provided an adequate explanation of the differences between the figures provided on 12 May 2015 and 24 August 2015.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Miss L’s complaint and no further action is required by Teachers’ Pensions.

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

Complaint summary

Miss L’s complaint against Teachers’ Pensions is about its decision not to refund contributions for a period of service that has caused her to exceed 365 days of pensionable service in a year.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Summary of application and background

Application Summary

The PPF Ombudsman has received a reference of a reviewable matter following a decision by the Board’s Reconsideration Committee dated 24 February 2017. The referral concerns Mr N’s entitlement to enhanced early retirement benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y disagrees with RBS and the Trustees’ interpretation of the Scheme rules and their decision that he was made voluntarily redundant from his employment with Ulster Bank. He says that his role was at risk of redundancy and therefore this makes him eligible for unreduced retirement benefits from the Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Dr A’s complaint and no further action is required by NHS BSA.

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

Complaint summary

Dr A’s complaint is that NHS BSA incorrectly calculated her NHS Permanent Injury Benefit (PIB).