Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr T has complained that he has an entitlement to benefits from the Fund in the form of a return of his employee contributions which he has not received and which the Fund denies.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint Summary

Mr N complained that when he was sent his retirement options, he was not provided with a transfer value illustration. Mr N considers that the absence of this information meant he was unable to make an informed decision when he selected his retirement benefits. Mr N said, had he known the transfer value amount, he would have transferred to another pension arrangement and received a higher lump sum.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Ms R’s complaint is that SPPA should re-instate her Mental Health Officer (MHO) status.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’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 N disagrees with the methodology used by Veterans UK to calculate his pension debit. He says that it results in a higher debit than that specified in the pension sharing order (PSO).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr D’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 D complains that the Trustees did not inform him that the early retirement pension available to him from the MPS since June 2009 would affect his means-tested State benefits. As a result, Mr D considers that he has suffered a significant financial loss.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Ms I’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

Ms I has complained that she made an application for ill health retirement (IHR) benefits on 9 December 2016, but that this was unduly delayed by the Trust and NHS BSA.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr L’s complaint is that his Scheme pension in payment was not uplifted to £5,078.84 at State Pension Age (SPA).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr R is unhappy that Equiniti understated the tax due for a transfer to a qualifying recognised overseas pension scheme (QROPS). Further, he is unhappy with Equiniti’s timing in notifying him of the error, which he says left him in a position where he was unable to make an informed decision about whether to transfer all of his accrued funds directly to a QROPS or to a self-invested personal pension (SIPP) instead.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr S has complained that SPPA did not carry out sufficient due diligence checks when he applied to transfer his benefits in the NHS Scheme to the Capita Oak Pension Scheme (the Capita Oak Scheme). If SPPA had carried out sufficient due diligence it would have noted that:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs N’s complaint and no further action is required by the Council.

Complaint summary

Mrs N’s complaint concerns the Council’s decision to refuse her application for ill health early retirement (IHER) as a deferred Scheme member.