Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should contact Mr T and assist in allowing him to exercise his statutory right of a transfer to a provider of his choice.  Fast Pensions should also pay Mr T, £1,000, to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to him by their maladministration.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Ms L has complained that Fidelity failed to act on her instructions, as it transferred her Self Invested Personal Pension (SIPP) from Hargreaves Lansdown (HL) in cash, rather than re-registering the funds. Ms L has said this has caused her a financial loss.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should contact Mr T and assist him with exercising his statutory transfer rights, and his transfer application to Hargreaves Lansdown.  Fast Pensions should also pay £1,000 to Mr T, to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to him by their maladministration.

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 Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Mr N’s questions regarding the status and security of the Plan, including the current value, and assist him in exercising his statutory right to a transfer if he so wishes.

Fast Pensions should also pay Mr N, £1,000, to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to him by their maladministration, which has resulted in him taking out personal loans to pay bills and to help provide for his family.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Mrs N’s questions regarding the status and security of the Plan, including the current value, and assist her in exercising her statutory right to a transfer if she so wishes.

Fast Pensions should also pay Mrs N, £1,000, to reflect the significant distress and inconvenience caused to her by their maladministration.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr B’s complaint and no further action is required by H & C.

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

Complaint summary

Mr B’s complaint is that he was wrongly advised by Lane Clark & Peacock (LC&P) through his employer, H & C, to opt out of the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme (SERPS).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr T’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 T has complained that the benefits he accrued in the Scheme during his employment, have been refunded back to Aviva.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr A’s complaint concerns Mr Farren’s failure to respond to his enquiries about the status and security of his Scheme funds, leaving him unable to plan for his future and exercise his transfer rights.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I uphold Mrs T’s complaint and direct that LBH pay her £500 for distress and inconvenience.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs T has complained that LBH is unwilling to honour an arrangement agreed in 2010, for her to defer payment of her retirement benefits for five years after her Normal Retirement Date (NRD), in exchange for enhanced benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr K’s complaint against James Hay 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, James Hay shall pay £1,300.75 into Mr K’s self-invested personal pension (SIPP) bank account.

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

Complaint summary

Mr K complains that James Hay has failed to collect the rent due in relation to a property held in his SIPP.