Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms D’s complaint against IFAP is upheld.

To put matters right, IFAP has a joint and several liability, with Halebarns Financial Planning Ltd (HFPL), (see previous Determination PO-20093) to pay into Ms D’s pension arrangement with Royal London, such amount as is necessary so that her monies in that arrangement are of the same value had £415,106 been paid into Ms D’s chosen investment on 8 December 2016.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Ms N’s complaint concerns the delay caused by Prudential when processing her transfer request. She had asked for her benefits in the Scheme to be transferred to Computershare Trust Company of Canada, Edward Jones Locked-in Registered Retirement Savings Plan 574-599 (the receiving scheme), but she claims Prudential’s delays prevented the transfer from taking place. As a result, this has caused a loss of investment growth, as well as distress and inconvenience.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr E’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right, Optimum shall pay him £2,000 for the exceptional distress and inconvenience caused.

Complaint summary

Mr E has complained that Optimum has failed to act on his transfer request.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr K is unhappy that the Trustee has refused to recalculate his cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) on the more generous calculation basis that applied prior to the Fund triggering wind-up.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Dr H has complained about the reduction in his cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) from the quotation provided on 4 May 2017 and the subsequent CETV quotation issued on 4 April 2018.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint summary

Mr L has complained that Fidelity delayed the transfer of the SIPP to A J Bell unnecessarily and that this has resulted in a financial loss.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s decision and reasons

The complaint is not upheld against Fidelity as the transfer request should have been submitted to FundsNetwork. Although Fidelity has provided some conflicting information over the transfer process, I do not find it is sufficient to warrant an award to Mr L.

Ombudsman’s Determination

I do not uphold Mr T’s complaint and no further action is required by MyCSP or the Employer.

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

Complaint summary

Mr T’s complaint is that his employer failed to provide clear, full and timely information about his transfer options in relation to his accrued pension benefits, around the time of a bulk pension transfer in 2016. As a result, he was denied the opportunity to make an informed decision about whether to take part in the transfer.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N complains that RPMI improperly transferred the pension benefits available to him from the BTPFSF into the West Midlands Pension Fund (WMPF) in April 1993 because it had failed to supply him with details of the transfer value (TV) which he had requested before proceeding.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr L’s complaint against the Trustee is that it mishandled his application to transfer out of the Plan. He says that this caused him to suffer a financial loss of £121,768.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr R is unhappy that Equiniti understated the tax due for a transfer to a qualifying recognised overseas pension scheme (QROPS). Further, he is unhappy with Equiniti’s timing in notifying him of the error, which he says left him in a position where he was unable to make an informed decision about whether to transfer all of his accrued funds directly to a QROPS or to a self-invested personal pension (SIPP) instead.