Subject

Mr Harris has complained that Aviva have not permitted him to receive the value of the Policy at age 60.

The Pensions Ombudsman’s determination and short reasons

The complaint should be upheld against Aviva. The Policy, whilst it does not properly deal with the circumstances that have arisen, should be construed in such a way as to allow the payment of a pension from age 60.

Subject

Mrs Spillett complains that the Trustee has incorrectly applied the state benefit deduction from age 60.

Complaint summary

Mrs Haskey has complained that the Trustee has incorrectly applied the basic state pension deduction to her pension benefits from June 2014.

Complaint summary

Mr Auguste has complained that Ascham Homes Limited (Ascham) improperly rejected his application for early payment of his pension on the grounds of business efficiency.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against Ascham because its decision was perverse.

Subject

Mr Heyes was made redundant in December 2010. Mr Heyes complains that his entitlement to an unabated pension paid on redundancy, known as Benefit 4, was incorrectly taken from him. To put matters right Mr Heyes wants to be paid Benefit 4, backdated to 1 January 2011.

Complaint summary

Mrs Davies complains that the Trustee will be incorrectly applying the state pension deduction (the Deduction) from her 60^th birthday, in 2015.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should not be upheld against the Trustee because there has been no maladministration. The Trustee has dealt with Mrs Davies’ pension in accordance with the Scheme rules, which states that her state pension age is her 60^th birthday.

Complaint summary

Mr Morris complains that Teachers’ Pensions incorrectly decided not to allow him to re-join the TPS and transfer his accrued pension rights from the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) into it.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should not be upheld. Mr Morris was not eligible to be an active member of the TPS. He was only very briefly misled to think that he could re-join.

Subject

Mr Nightingale’s complaint against Kent County Council is that it mis-managed his appeal against the decision not to award him early release of his benefits under the Scheme on compassionate grounds. He is also unhappy with the original decision that was made.

The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman’s determination and short reasons

The complaint should be upheld against the Council as it failed to consider whether an exception to its usual policy should be made in Mr Nightingale’s case.

Subject

Ms Williams’ complaint about NHS Pensions, the managers of the Scheme, is that they should re-instate her Special Class status (SCS) under the Scheme which she says was removed in 2004. She adds that she has believed over the last 36 years that she qualified for SCS and planned accordingly.

The Pensions Ombudsman’s determination and short reasons

I find in Ms Williams’ favour. The nature of her work means that she does in fact qualify for SCS.

Complaint summary

Miss Marshall has complained that Barnsley have refused her request to allow the late transfer of the pension benefits from previous employments.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld because Barnsley did not take proper account of all relevant factors in deciding whether to extend the period for transfer.