Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs L’s complaint and no further action is required by NHSBA.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr E’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 E disagrees with the decision of the Trustees not to allow him to take advantage of Pension Freedoms and transfer his protected benefits out of the Scheme. He also says that the Trustees failed to inform him about his right to take a “bulk” transfer and thus keep the protected elements of his benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr L says Fidelity repeatedly failed to provide confirmation on his protected tax free cash entitlement, equalisation of his benefits, and to provide other information originally requested in November 2016. Fidelity also failed to administer his Plan correctly and mishandled his complaint.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr K’s complaint and no further action is required by NHS BSA or Equiniti.

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

Complaint summary

Mr K is unhappy because Equiniti, on NHS BSA’s behalf, is seeking to recover an overpayment from him in relation to a Permanent Injury Benefit (PIB) award he receives from the Scheme.

NHS BSA has confirmed that an overpayment accrued because Mr K’s PIB award began to be paid before it had been abated.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr I’s complaint and no further action is required by Cabinet Office, MyCSP or the Employer.

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

Complaint summary

Mr I complains that he was granted ill-health retirement (IHR) as a member of the Alpha section of the PCSPS, rather than the Classic section. As a result, part of his pension has been calculated in accordance with the Alpha section regulations, which in his case provide less favourable benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’s complaint, and no further action is required by AJ Bell.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S’s complaint against AJ Bell is about its poor service, negligence, maladministration and misconduct.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr A has complained that the fund growth detailed in the Plan’s fund factsheet does not match the limited growth achieved by his Plan. He therefore suggests the fund factsheet is misleading and is not fit for purpose.

Mr A would like Aegon to increase his fund value to match the returns detailed in the fund factsheet.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by James Hay, other than those that it is already in the process of completing.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S complains about James Hay’s administration of his SIPP, and the changes made to its terms and conditions, as well as the fees charged, of which he says he had no notification.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs R’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

Mrs R’s complaint is that NHS BSA, the Scheme Manger, failed to pay her a share of the lump sum death benefits payment it paid following the death of her mother, Dr Y.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr T complaint and no further action is required by GAD.

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

Complaint summary

Mr T has complained that his lump sum has not been recalculated in line with revised commutation factors provided by GAD.