Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by Thales.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that he did not receive the full pension increases for 2017/18, because he retired part way through the year.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr H’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 H has complained that he should have received benefits from the Fund following the death of his brother (Mr J). Mr H contends that Mr J was given incorrect information that led to an expectation that death benefits would be due.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr A’s complaint and no further action is required by Capita or the Trustee.

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

Complaint summary

Mr A’s complaint against the Trustee is summarised as:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by Hornbuckle.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs K’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trust or NHS BSA.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs K’s complaint is about the loss of her Special Class Status (SCS) and that she was not informed about its removal.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs R’s complaints against NEST are about:

1) how it asked for information when processing her claim for benefits;
2) that it mislaid her driving licence; and
3) about the problems she experienced when trying to submit online messages

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr L’s complaint against Trustees and Xafinity is not upheld, as although there was some maladministration on the part of Xafinity, the administrators addressed the issue once Mr L had formerly complained and Xafinity offered to pay Mr L £500 in recognition of Mr L’s significant distress and inconvenience.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Ms S’ complaint and no further action is required by BAPSL or the Trustee.

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

Complaint summary

Ms S alleges that BAPSL provided misleading information and made other administrative errors following her subsequent enquiries. Ms S says she delayed exercising her right to take a cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) as a direct result.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr E’s complaint against Aviva is that the transfer value he has been provided with does not reflect the value of the benefits within the Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs N’s complaint and no further action is required by NHS Lanarkshire or SPPA. The overpayment is recoverable, and Mrs N should contact SPPA to reach an agreement to repay the money paid to her over her entitlement.

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

Complaint summary