NHS Pension Scheme (CAS-58918-R9V9)
Ombudsman’s Determination
Outcome
I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint, and no further action is required by NHS BSA.
My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below in paragraphs 45 to 53.
I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint, and no further action is required by NHS BSA.
My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below in paragraphs 45 to 53.
Mr R’s complaint against Mercer and the Trustee is partly upheld. To put matters right, Mercer shall pay Mr R £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience he suffered.
I do not uphold Dr H’s complaint, and no further action is required by Trustee or the Administrator.
The complaint is upheld because K Ltd has not presented any legal basis on which it was able to deny the transfer of Ms N’s benefits, nor has it given a reasonable explanation for the delay.
The complaint is upheld because S Ltd has not presented any legal basis on which it was able to deny the transfer of Ms N’s benefits, nor has it given a reasonable explanation for the delay.
I do not uphold Mr N’s complaint, and no further action is required by Rothesay and the Trustee.
Mr N’s complaint is that:-
Mr T’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay the missing contributions in respect of his pension and make good any shortfall in units. In addition, the Employer shall pay Mr T £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience it has caused him.
I do not uphold Miss E’s complaint and no further action is required by NHS BSA.
I do not uphold Mrs S’ complaint and no further action is required by NHS BSA.
I uphold part, but not all of Dr S’ complaint. To put matters right for the part of the complaint I uphold, Fidelity shall adjust the units held in Dr S’ SIPP to put the plan in the position it would now be in if the transfer had not been delayed by ten working days.