Ombudsman Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold the complaint and no further action is required by Equitable Life.

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

Complaint summary

Miss S has complained that the provision of incorrect information by Equitable Life amounts to maladministration, which has caused her significant distress and inconvenience.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs D’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right TP should pay her £500 in compensation for the distress and inconvenience they have caused her.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Abbey Life should pay Mr N:

• £1,500 in recognition of the non-financial loss that has been suffered; and
• an amount to recognise that Mr N changed his position based on the incorrect figures he was provided with.

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

Complaint summary

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained that Phoenix provided him with misinformation regarding his pension entitlement from the Plan.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs R’s complaint and no further action is required by Friends Life.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs R has complained that during a call with Friends Life on 9 September 2015, she was given incorrect information regarding the date at which she would be able to claim her benefits from the Plan.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs Y has complained that she (and her ex-husband, Professor Y) was given incorrect information by USS, regarding the age at which she would be able to access an unreduced share of his pension, on obtaining a Pension Sharing Order.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr M is complaining that he received an incorrect quotation from JLT which was £30,000 higher than his actual entitlement under the Fund.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr E has complained that Aviva incorrectly informed him in June 2011 that it was not possible to pay him a pension from the Plan at its maturity date on 8 June 2011 because there were insufficient funds in the Plan to cover the Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP) liability. He says that as a consequence of mistake:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint against Equiniti, the Bank and the Trustees is partly upheld. To put matters right, within 21 days, Equiniti and the Bank should both pay Mr Y £500, making a total of £1,000 to compensate for the significant distress and inconvenience he has suffered.

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