Skip to main content

Local Government Pension Scheme (PO-20267)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not agree that this complaint should be upheld and in my opinion no further action is required by OCC.

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y’s complaint is that OCC, his employer, has refused his application for Ill Health Retirement (IHR).

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Servest Group Ltd Final Salary Retirement Benefit Scheme (PO-13359)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Servest complains that RL intends to apply a substantial charge in the event the Scheme is discontinued. Servest brings this complaint in its capacity as the employer responsible for managing the scheme.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should not be upheld because RL has demonstrated that the contested charge is recoverable under the terms of the policy governing the Scheme.

 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Pennines Retirement Benefits Scheme (PO-22943)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr S’s complaint is about Dalriada’s management of the Scheme. He complains about the length of time its investigations are taking, the legal fees being deducted from the Scheme, not being given correct or up to date information and decisions being made by Dalriada without his authority.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Prudential Personal Pension Policy (PO-27369)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N argues that he is entitled to benefits from the Policy, despite Prudential informing him that he was incorrectly receiving statements intended for a policyholder who has the same name. Due to the erroneously issued statements from Prudential, Mr N believed that he was entitled to retirement benefits from the Policy of around £103,000.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that DCCG misreported his redundancy entitlement to NHS BSA, when saying that he is subject to Agenda for Change redundancy terms as opposed to Very Senior Manager (VSM) terms, which he says he is contractually entitled to. As a result, NHS BSA has been paying the incorrect level of pension.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Teachers’ Pension Scheme (PO-23961)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr T’s complains that TP and UoH refused to refund his Scheme contributions, made after 1 June 2015, in accordance with the Scheme Rules.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

British Transport Police Superannuation Fund (PO-16920)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

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 against the Trustee concerns its decision not to award him an enhanced ill health pension in 1999.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Royal London (formerly Scottish Life) – Talisman Pension Plans (PO-27598)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N complains that he was not informed that the increased contribution of £70 he made to the Plan in 1997 did not attract a Guaranteed Annuity Rate (GAR). He says he was not informed of the rule change implemented in 1994 and, if he had been, he would have made different investment choices.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Police Pension Scheme (PO-24096)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr R complains that SWP is preventing him from transferring out the benefits which he had previously transferred into the Scheme.

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Subscribe to Not upheld