Firemen’s Pension Scheme 1992 (CAS-84083-M5S5)
Ombudsman’s Determination
Outcome
The complaint is upheld against the Authority because:-
The complaint is upheld against the Authority because:-
I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustees.
I do not uphold Mr R’s complaint, and no further action is required by TP.
I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint, and no further action is required by the Trustee.
My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail in paragraphs 40 to 52 below.
Mr Y’s complaint is partly upheld and to put matters right Johnson & Johnson shall amend Mr Y’s final pensionable pay to £114,190.33. It shall also pay Mr Y £1,000 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to him by Johnson & Johnson’s maladministration.
The complaint is partly upheld against the Trustees, I am satisfied that:-
Mrs H’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay £1,910.75 into the Scheme. The Employer shall ensure that Mrs H is not financially disadvantaged by its maladministration, so, it shall arrange for any investment loss to be calculated and paid into the Scheme.
I do not uphold Mr Y’s complaint, and no further action is required by NHS BSA.
My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail in paragraphs 42 to 56 below.
Mr T’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Cheshire Service shall take the actions set out in paragraph 105.
I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint, and no further action is required by the Trustee or the Administrator.