Complaint summary

Dr Crawford’s complaint is that she was:

PENSION SCHEMES ACT 1993, PART X

DETERMINATION BY THE DEPUTY PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN

Subject

Mrs M’s complaint against the Trustee is that it provided her with incorrect information about the application of the State Pension Deduction to her pension. In addition, the Trustee has not correctly applied and misinterpreted the provisions of the rules to the Scheme.

The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman’s determination and short reasons

Complaint Summary

Mr Moynihan complains that Prudential’s sales representative improperly persuaded him to pay additional voluntary contributions (AVCs) to Prudential. He also alleges that the sales representative did not inform him that he could purchase past added years (PAY) in the Teachers’ Pension Scheme.

Complaint summary

Mrs Fewings has complained that Capita Hartshead, the former scheme administrator, provided incorrect information resulting in the overpayment of her pension benefits, which she is now required to repay.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against MyCSP, the new scheme administrator, because Mrs Fewings relied on the overpayment in good faith and changed her position to the extent that it would not be equitable to require her to repay the money.

Subject

My Civil Service Pensions (My CSP) provided an incorrect pension quotation on which Mr Hession decided to retire.

Summary of the Deputy Pensions Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be partly upheld against My CSP.  Errors were made when calculating Mr Hession’s final retirement benefits.  Although I am unable to conclude on balance that he would not have retired anyway, the level of compensation for distress and inconvenience should be higher than the sum currently offered.

Complaint Summary

Mr Reynolds has complained that the Trustees gave him incorrect information about his early retirement benefits which he relied upon to his detriment. He says that the compensation they have offered him for their errors and for having to pursue his complaint with them was insufficient.

Complaint Summary

Mrs Horsnell has complained that she was given wrong and misleading advice concerning the tax status of a redundancy payment that was paid into the Scheme.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld to the extent that Mrs Horsnell has incurred some unnecessary fees and distress.  However, she has not suffered a direct financial loss.

Complaint summary

Dr Alford has complained that NHS Pensions’ maladministration of the annual pension estimate process has resulted in him being liable for an Annual Allowance (AA) tax charge in the 2011/12 tax year.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should not be upheld against NHS Pensions because there was no statutory duty to provide a Pension Saving Statement prior to the end of the 2011/12 tax year. While the estimate information that they gave could have been clearer it was not provided for AA purposes.

Complaint summary

Mr Sherratt complains against Cheshire West & Chester Council, the Administering Authority, because they supplied him with incorrect pension statements, which he relied on in order to take early retirement.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against Cheshire West & Chester Council because they raised Mr Sherratt’s expectations by providing an incorrect statement.

Complaint summary

Miss Khatra has complained that she should receive compensation for a loss of income connected to:

• maladministration of her added years contributions;
• receipt of an incorrect estimate of retirement benefits upon which she based her decision to retire; and
• a delay in paying her benefits.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be partly upheld against CNWL, to the extent that they compensate Miss Khatra for the distress and inconvenience caused by their maladministration.