Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right Phoenix Life should pay him £1,000, including £500 for his distress and inconvenience.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mr S’s complaint against Phoenix, the scheme administrator, is that it unreasonably delayed a transfer of his funds to another provider.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Dr R’s complaint against Teachers’ Pensions is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with.  To put matters right (for the part that is upheld) Teachers’ Pensions should pay Dr R £500 as compensation for the distress and inconvenience he has experienced.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint summary

Mr E’s complaint is that LBG has not provided him with a preserved pension following the transfer of his contract of employment to TSB under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) regulations (TUPE). He says that he was assured he would receive membership of the Scheme but ultimately his contributions were returned, with the consequence that he has lost his employer contributions for a little under three months.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs L’s complaint and no further action is required by NILGOSC.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

There are three parts to Mrs L’s complaint.  These are:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained that Clerical Medical has refused to transfer the value of his Plan to the Marchar Ltd Retirement Benefits Scheme (the Marchar Scheme) and he has lost out on a large financial gain he would otherwise have attained.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr L’s complaint and no further action is required by Royal Mail.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr X’s complaint concerns Mr Farren’s failure to respond to his enquiries about the status and security of his Scheme funds, leaving him unable to plan for his future and exercise his transfer rights.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mr D’s complaint is that Carey Pensions caused a delay in the transfer of his pension to a new provider. This resulted in a loss of income in the invested funds of approximately £3,500.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Hornbuckle shall pay Mr N £500 for distress and inconvenience caused and pay into the SIPP’s bank account  £1,875.65 plus reimburse its own charges that may have been claimed in respect of processing Mr N’s transfer request.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.