Outcome

1. Mrs Y’s complaint against the Council and TP is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Ms R’s complaint and no further action is required by the Cabinet Office or MyCSP.

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

Complaint summary

Ms R has complained about the attempted recovery of an overpayment made by MyCSP, the application of an incorrect tax code, and the lack of pension increases which were due.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Dr E’s complaint and no further action is required by either the Administrator or by the Trustee.

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

Complaint summary

Dr E is unhappy that the Administrator and Trustee are seeking to recoup an overpayment of pension benefits. They propose to do this by reducing the amount of Dr E’s pension in payment.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint against KMFA 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) KMFA should pay Mr N £500 for significant distress and inconvenience.

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

Complaint summary

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr Y’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 Y complains that Aviva has requested that he repay an overpayment of pension benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint and no further action is required by Teachers’ Pensions.

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

Complaint summary

Mr E has complained that Teacher’s Pensions failed to implement a Court Order issued prior to him taking benefits. This has led to him receiving an overpayment that Teacher’s Pensions is now trying to recover.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs N’s complaint and no further action is required by NHS Lanarkshire or SPPA. The overpayment is recoverable, and Mrs N should contact SPPA to reach an agreement to repay the money paid to her over her entitlement.

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

Complaint summary

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained about an overpayment made by Teachers’ Pensions and its subsequent request for repayment. He considers that its administrative systems have failed, and that Teachers’ Pensions ought to have had more robust systems in place to prevent pensioners from being disadvantaged in the way that he has been.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mrs T has complained that the Department mistakenly paid her an ill health early retirement (IHER) pension and lump sum, and is now requesting the return of these overpaid sums.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint against RMSPS 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) RMSPS should write off the overpayments that are subject to the limitation defence. RMSPS is able to recover overpayments made on and after 31 January 2012.  RMSPS should also pay Mr Y the £500 previously offered.

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