Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y complained that Aviva (previously Sun Life) is not allowing him to take a tax-free lump sum, or early retirement, from the Plan. He said the policy document (the Policy) sets out both as options.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr U complains that he was not given sufficient time to consider his options after being informed that his Plan investments were being switched to a new fund.

As a result of the switch, he says he was unable to transfer his Plan investment, and this has resulted in an investment loss of around £17,000. Mr U would like to be compensated for this.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Miss E complains about Fidelity’s poor administration. She claims the following:-

Fidelity was not transparent about the applicable fees.

The fees appeared to be inconsistent.

Fidelity had caused delays with a payment into the Scheme.

Fidelity had incorrectly added a beneficiary to her pension.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Miss E’s complaint is about the £45 investor charge that had been applied to her pension account, as well as Fidelity’s delay in processing her application. Miss E decided to transfer her benefits from the Scheme to another provider because of Fidelity’s actions. As a result, Miss E would like Fidelity to ensure that she has not experienced a financial loss and for it to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr D’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

Mr D complains that the Trustees did not inform him that the early retirement pension available to him from the MPS since June 2009 would affect his means-tested State benefits. As a result, Mr D considers that he has suffered a significant financial loss.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I agree that part, but not all, of this complaint should be upheld. To put matters right for the part that should be upheld, Skipton BS and the Skipton Trustee shall jointly pay £1,000 to Mr Y, in recognition of the serious distress and inconvenience that has been caused.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’ complaint is partly upheld. On the recommendation of one of our Adjudicators, the Trustee has paid Mr S a suitable award for the non-financial injustice caused, and so I make no further directions.

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that the Trustee changed the Scheme benefits calculation method after he agreed to take voluntary redundancy (VR).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained that the Respondents failed to offer him access to an unreduced pension when he was offered voluntary redundancy. Mr N believes he was entitled to be offered an unreduced pension in the event of voluntary redundancy as he had a protected pension age (PPA) and it was an entitlement under the Scheme Rules.

He says that if he had been offered it, he would have accepted it.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr K has complained that Prudential did not advise him of the impact the State Spreading Option (SSO) would have on his Lifetime Allowance (LTA). Mr K says when he started receiving pension benefits from another provider it caused him to exceed his LTA, incurring a higher tax charge.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mrs M successfully transferred-out her benefits held within the Scheme. During her transfer application, all members of the Scheme were sent details of a transfer enhancement exercise. Mrs M said that she did not receive this and so her transfer was completed with a non-enhanced transfer value.