Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr D’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 D’s complaint against Friends Life is that he is unhappy with the date it has used to calculate his transfer value, as he believes the units were actually sold at a later date and Friends Life has profited from this.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Dr D is unhappy because, as a re-employed retired member, he has to pay higher contributions into the Scheme. As the Scheme is a defined benefit scheme, he will not receive additional benefits for his higher contributions. He is therefore unhappy that he is paying more into the Scheme than others, yet will not derive any additional benefit from it.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs F’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Prudential should:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs L’s complaint and no further action is required by NHSBA.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’s complaint and no further action is required by JLT or the Trustees.

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

Complaint summary

Mr N’s complaint arises because he considers the Trustees calculated his pension benefits incorrectly.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr N’s complaint and no further action is required by WPD or the Trustees.

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

Complaint summary

Mr N’s complaint is that:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr B’s complaint is that WMFS had a duty to inform him that he had reached 30 years’ service and therefore could have opted out of the Scheme. He is asking for a refund of the contributions he has paid since reaching the maximum level of service.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I partly uphold Mr G’s complaint and I direct Merton to pay an award of £500 to Mr G for significant distress and inconvenience.

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

Complaint summary

Mr G has said that he is entitled to a refund of contributions from the Scheme, but Merton and PSS dispute this. Mr G is also unhappy that the Respondents do not hold records relating to his pension benefits, and that there were delays in dealing with his complaint.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr T’s complaint and no further action is required by GE or the Trustees of the Plan.

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

Complaint summary

Mr T has complained that GE has not applied discretionary increases to the pre-April 1997 element of his pension since 2009.