Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by Hornbuckle.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S’ complaint is about the misinformation he says Hornbuckle provided to him on how to sell shares from his Self-Invested Personal Pension (SIPP). As a result, there were delays in selling shares which Mr S claims led to a financial loss.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs D’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

Mrs D has complained that the Trustee has, at the current time, declined her request to take pension benefits. Additionally she has said that the Trustee has failed to keep her updated.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs T’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustees.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs T has complained that the Trustees of the Scheme failed to collect the Profit Share Contribution that should have been paid and disputes their interpretation of the amount required.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’s complaint and no further action is required by Legal & General

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint against the Trustee 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, the Trustee should pay Mr T £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience caused to him by the misinformation he received. The complaint against the Administrator is not upheld.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs Y has complained that an error in the information that NLD submitted to NHS Business Services Authority (NHS BSA) (formerly NHS Pensions) resulted in NHS BSA providing an overinflated retirement quotation on 7 November 2012. Mrs Y relied upon this quotation and decided to retire.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr E has complained that:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs R has complained that Aviva (formally Norwich Union) did not inform her when it changed the terms of her original contract. In particular, she says she was not made aware that the age she could access her pension benefits was increasing from age 50 to age 55.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs M’s complaint and no further action is required by Aon and Babcock.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs M has complained that her late husband Mr M received incorrect information from Aon about the form of authority it required to disclose his Scheme benefits to other parties, and Aon also delayed in dealing with the request for his cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) and lump sum values.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has made a complaint against the Council and TP for their failure to provide him with his retirement options as he was approaching his normal pension age (NPA), which was his 60^th