Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr D’s complaint is that the Scheme’s 1997 Deed of Amendment means that his current wife is not entitled to a full widow’s pension.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint Summary

Mrs N complains that she disagrees with the Trustee’s decision to reduce her pension at age 65 and not age 66.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr X’s complaint is that he was misinformed about the level of Surviving Partner’s pension that would be payable from the Fund in the event that he pre-deceases his wife.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr T has complained that Aviva refused to pay him a lump sum from his Annuity.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mrs T contends that the temporary additional pension available to her from the State Spreading Option (SSO) in the PSPS should be paid by the Trustees up to her new State Pension Age (SPA) of 66 and not cease at age 65 as originally intended.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr D has complained that the Scheme was amended by an undisclosed deed which detrimentally altered the method of calculation of his pension.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr H’s complaint and no further action is required by either EPF or HPF.

Complaint summary

The Scheme is made up of a series of Funds which are administered by different administrators. Mr H has complained that he has been unable to “consolidate” his EPF and HPF benefits. He says that he will suffer a loss of pension benefits if he is unable to “consolidate” his two pensions.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr R’s complaint against Prudential is partly upheld, but there is part of the complaint that I do not agree with. To put matters right, Prudential shall pay Mr R £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience that has been caused.