Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr D’s complaint is that Apple has been unable to find any records relating to his preserved pension which was last valued in 1999 at approximately £41,000.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’s complaint and no further action is required by Friends Life

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

Complaint summary

Mr N’s complaint against Friends Life is about its failure to trace him in 2006 when his pension benefits from the Air Holdings Limited 1958 Pension Scheme (the Scheme) matured. Mr N says that as a result he has missed out on ten years of pension benefits and would like to be compensated for this.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr R is not able to locate his pension, and considers that this is due to the maladministration of Safran.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

1. Miss A’s complaint against Capita, the Scheme administrator, and Wiltshire Police is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr H has complained about the non-payment of his pension benefits. After using the Pensions Tracing Service, Mr H was advised that Phoenix Life was the “last insurer” of the Scheme. As such, he believes Phoenix Life may have the responsibility of paying his benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs D’s complaint, and no further action is required by the Council and Teachers’ Pensions.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs D’s complaint concerns her missing Scheme benefits. Mrs D considers that they should have been preserved in the Scheme, as she completed the minimum five years’ qualifying service. Mrs D says that Teachers’ Pensions has a responsibility to establish the day she allegedly was not in pensionable service.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr S complains that Aviva is now responsible for paying him a pension in respect of his Scheme entitlement and that it has refused to pay him the benefits that he is due. The Scheme has now been wound up.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs N’s complaint and no further action is required by Wills Towers Watson.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs N has complained that she made pension contributions into the Scheme but the Administrator has no record of her.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’ complaint is upheld. To put matters right, Scottish Widows shall provide Mr S with a deferred annuity equal in value to the deferred pension benefits that accrued for and in respect of him under the Scheme up to 5 April 1996, making allowance for the statutory revaluation increase that the deferred pension benefits would have attracted to date, inform Mr S in writing of the current value of that deferred annuity, and pay Mr S £500 for his significant distress and inconvenience.