Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint against the MoJ is upheld. To put matters right, the MoJ shall increase the redress amount payable to Mr T from £1,500 to £3,000 to reflect the exceptional distress and inconvenience caused by its maladministration.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr H’s complaint, and no further action is required by Phoenix Life.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’s complaint, and no further action is required by Fidelity.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome 

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

Complaint summary 

Mrs S has complained that in April 2019, the Fund’s administrator at the time confirmed she had received an overpayment that would need to be refunded and it subsequently provided poor service in response to the related enquiries and complaints she raised.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome 

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

Complaint summary 

Mr D has complained that he should be allowed to retire early at age 50 but that this option is being incorrectly denied by the Constabulary on the basis that the career breaks he took are not recognised as qualifying service under the Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination 

Complaint Summary

Mrs L has complained that the Trustee failed to administer the trust in accordance with the Scheme rules.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint is upheld against the Trustee for:

• Maladministration and failure to distribute the lump sum death payment in accordance with the Scheme rules at the time of the Member’s death; and 
• Breach of equitable duty of care.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome 

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

Complaint summary 

Mr G has complained that he has not been awarded the appropriate tier of ill health retirement benefits. He contends that he should be awarded Tier 3 as he has been unable to work since 2018.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is not upheld because I find that Mr S did not wholly rely on the information he was given by the Council preceding the misinformation, and to the extent that he did, it was not reasonable for him to have done so.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is not upheld because I find that Mr R would not have acted differently, had he not received the incorrect information.