Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Trustee should reconsider its decision to cease Mr N’s pension. It should also pay Mr N £500 for non-financial injustice.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs S’ complaint is upheld and to put matters right NHS Pensions should write off the overpayment in question and reimburse Mrs S any overpayments it has already recovered, with interest added.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr D’s complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, Curtis Banks should provide redress on the terms set out in its offer to this Office and send Mr D summary statements showing the monetary effect of the redress. Curtis Banks should also pay Mr D £750 for the significant distress and inconvenience he has experienced.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Friends Life should pay her the unauthorised member payment tax charge and surcharge less the notional tax liability she would have paid had the full pension been taken as an uncrystallised funds pension lump sum (UFPLS). In addition it should pay Mrs N £1,000 for the significant distress and inconvenience caused by its error.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms R’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right both AJ Bell and L&G should compensate Mrs R for any financial loss caused by the transfer delay.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs R is complaining that she has suffered financial loss as a consequence of delays on the part of L&G and AJ Bell in transferring her Plan benefits to TD Direct SIPP (the SIPP).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Miss T’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right RPMI should refer the decision back to the Committee, which should make the decision afresh taking into account all relevant evidence within 28 days of the date of this determination.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs S’ complaint is upheld against ReAssure, but not against Transact.  To put matters right, ReAssure should pay £500 compensation to Mrs S, for the significant distress and inconvenience that has been caused to her.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs S’ complaint about ReAssure (the ceding scheme) and Transact (the receiving scheme), is that they both contributed to delaying the transfer of her funds, which resulted in financial loss to her.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint is upheld against ReAssure, but not against Transact.  To put matters right, ReAssure should pay £500 compensation to Mr Y, for the significant distress and inconvenience that has been caused to him.

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y’s complaint about ReAssure (the ceding scheme) and Transact (the receiving scheme), is that they both contributed to delaying the transfer of his funds, which resulted in financial loss to him.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs A’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right, Mr David Ryan should pay to   Mrs A’s GPP the missing pension contributions with interest, and £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr E’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the CO should cease the deduction of Employment Support Allowance (ESA) from his Injury Pension and refund to him all ESA deductions that have been made to date, with interest.

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

Complaint summary

Mr E’s complaint is that MyCSP has been deducting an amount equal to his ESA benefit payments from his Injury Pension.