Skip to main content

The Mr S Limited Executive Pension Scheme (CAS-78433-Y1Y8)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

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 S, and because it fulfilled the duties it did have in relation to the Scheme adequately. 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms N’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay £86.82 into the Scheme. The Employer shall ensure that Ms N is not financially disadvantaged by its maladministration. So, it shall arrange for any investment loss to be calculated and paid into the Scheme. 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Harrods Group Pension Plan (CAS-111806-F8J2)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr W’s complaint against Aptia is partly upheld. To put matters right, Aptia shall pay Mr W £500 for the distress and inconvenience its maladministration caused him. 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

HBOS Final Salary Pension Scheme (CAS-31532-G2M0)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome 

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Smiths Industries Pension Scheme (CAS-90329-R7N2)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Smart Pensions (CAS-109231-Q6Q9)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Miss S’ complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay £3,000.06 into the Scheme. The Employer shall ensure that Miss S is not financially disadvantaged by its maladministration. So, it shall arrange for any investment loss to be calculated and paid into the Scheme. 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

True Potential Investments Pension Scheme (CAS-116602-S0V9)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms N’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay £1,684.24 into the Scheme. The Employer shall ensure that Ms N is not financially disadvantaged by its maladministration. So, it shall arrange for any investment loss to be calculated and paid into the Scheme. 

View determination

Download

Related decisions

The Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (CAS-100357-F0Y8)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Tesco Plc Pension Scheme (CAS-77012-F0S2)

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold this complaint, and no further action is required by the Trustee. 

Complaint summary

Mr S as the executor of the Estate, has complained that:-

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Complainant:
Complaint Topic:
Ref:
Outcome:
Respondent:
Type:
Date:
Appeal:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr A’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Employer shall pay him £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience it has caused him.  

View determination

Download

Related decisions

Subscribe to Pension complaint or dispute