Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr R has complained that:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is not upheld against Rowanmoor as Administrator, as it was not its responsibility to carry out the level of due diligence suggested by Mr N, and because it fulfilled the duties it did have in relation to the Scheme adequately. 

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Dr A’s complaint and no further action is required by NHS BSA. 

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr D’s complaint is not upheld and no further action is required by the Employer. 

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Ms S’ complaint and no further action is required by NHS BSA.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint is not upheld because at the time the investments were made, it was not the responsibility of either Carey Pension Trustees UK Limited or Carey Pensions UK LLP to carry out the level of due diligence suggested by Mrs H, taking into account the relevant law and th

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr O’s complaint and no action is required by the Trustee or the Administrator.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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