Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Ms R’s complaint and no further action is required by the Hospice.

Complaint summary

Ms R’s complaint is that the Hospice unfairly deprived her of an entitlement to join the Scheme, under the Hospice’s NHS direction body status.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr S complains that the Annual Benefit Statements (ABS) provided to him by the Trustee led him to believe his entitlement would be considerably greater than it is. Mr S feels that the shortfall has made a significant difference to his income in retirement and that he should be compensated.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained about an incorrect cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) that he received in March 2017 (the 2017 CETV). He claims that he relied on the 2017 CETV, that it was reasonable for him to do so, and that he has suffered a financial loss that he cannot mitigate.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr D’s complaint is that incorrect literature from Phoenix caused him to defer taking retirement benefits to his normal retirement age (NRA) of 60, in November 2018. He expected a higher terminal bonus in lieu of the pension payments that he would have received by retiring earlier.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint Summary

Ms L’s complaint is that WYPF calculated the value of her Scheme pension entitlement incorrectly.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr L is unhappy that the Trustee will not pay his pension benefits from his normal retirement date (NRD) in 2016. Further, he says it was not clear at the time that the option to be paid his benefits from NRD would not be available at a later date.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint.

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

Complaint summary

Mr E complains that in June 2017 the Trustee and Aon provided him with a quotation incorrectly showing that the total cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) available to him from the Plan of £542,621.87 excluded his Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVCs). He says that:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’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 N £500, as previously offered, to recognise his significant distress and inconvenience.

Complaint summary

Mr N is complaining that the Trustee provided him with incorrect details of his benefits from the Plan in 2004, which he says he relied upon to make financial decisions.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’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 Y complains he has received conflicting information from the Trustee as to whether his transferred-in service would be included in calculating whether he qualifies for unreduced, early retirement from the Scheme.