Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr D has complained that his eligibility for incapacity retirement benefits has not been considered in a proper manner.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mrs E says that she was made redundant by SCONUL on 16 November 2012. She alleges that SCONUL subsequently incorrectly informed USS Ltd that she had left by mutual agreement and was therefore not entitled to an unreduced immediate early retirement pension from the USS.

She also complains that USS Ltd provided her with insufficient and misleading information about her USS pension rights available on redundancy which resulted in her failure to apply for an unreduced pension from the USS in November 2012.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs S’s complaint is that Aviva incorrectly informed her that she could take benefits from three policies within the Scheme as a lump sum.

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 has complained that the Trustees have incorrectly interpreted the rules of the Plan and his benefits should be based on a Total Annual Benefits (TAE) basis for all of his service up to 31 May 2004 and not on a basic salary basis for service from 10 December 1998.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint against the Trustee 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 Trustee shall pay Mr N £500 for significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Complaint summary

Mr N is unhappy because the Trustee has applied a reduction to his Scheme benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr Y has complained that Friends Life failed to contact him in a timely manner to implement a Pension Sharing Order (the PSO) and then implemented that order incorrectly. Friends Life also ignored his various complaints.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should not be upheld against Friends Life because:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mrs N has complained that Mr Y is obstructing access to her pension by refusing to agree calculations to implement the Pension Sharing Order (PSO) made after their divorce in 2006.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against Mr Y because he has unreasonably failed to agree the calculations in his capacity as the Trustee.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs T’s complaint is that she has been refused ill health early retirement (IHER).

Mrs T is concerned that Barclays has not considered her circumstances in full and only assessed her likelihood of recovery by reference to the general population.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr R has complained that NHSBSA has not calculated his pension benefits correctly because an incorrect reckonable pay figure has been used, and the necessary increases have not been applied as required.