Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr T is dissatisfied with the Department’s decision not to allow him membership of either the Alpha section or the Partnership Account when he chose to opt back into the Scheme. The Department say he, Mr T, is only eligible to join the Classic section of the Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr L says Nest unreasonably delayed claiming tax relief on his pension contribution of £500. Although Nest has made good the financial loss, it delayed the process and failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. Nest then mismanaged his subsequent enquiries and complaint. He has not been compensated for the mistakes made.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Ms P says Aegon disguised underperformance of two of her investment funds and mismanaged the subsequent transfer of her assets to the SIPP. She would like to be reimbursed her transfer fee and fully compensated for any shortfall in investment growth she may have suffered as a result.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs Y complains that NHSBSA, the manager of the Scheme, has wrongly declined her application for permanent injury benefits (PIB) on the grounds that the injuries to her back and neck were not wholly or mainly attributable to her NHS employment.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold the applicants’ complaint and no further action is required by Hornbuckle.

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

Complaint summary

The applicants have complained that there have been delays with transferring the Scheme to a new provider, Dentons, and that they have been overcharged for the below par level of Trustee management. The applicants wish to recover the fees they have paid to Hornbuckle plus the fees paid to Dentons and their representative.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr L has complained that HSC has not granted him Mental Health Officer (MHO) status for the period 1986 to present. The effect of this is that he has not accrued sufficient pensionable service in order to retire early without a reduction to his pension benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’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

Mr N’s complaint is about the Trustee’s interpretation of the Scheme’s Rules in relation to the calculation of pensionable salary increases.

He claims that he was entitled to, but did not receive, a pensonable salary increase review on 1 October 2015. Mr N says this has had a detrimental effect on his retirement benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr L is unhappy because HSC has refused to grant him Mental Health Officer (MHO) status for the period of 1989 to present. The effect of this is that he has not accrued sufficient pensionable service in order to retire early without a reduction to his pension benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs Y’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

Mrs Y has complained about the Trustee’s distribution of death benefits. This matter was reconsidered by the Trustee, but the outcome has not changed. She has said the Trustee has failed to take account of recent information and arguments she has raised, and not provided an adequate explanation for the decision reached.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs D’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

Mrs D’s complaint against the Trustee is that she was given incorrect retirement benefit quotations which she relied on when making the decision to retire early.