Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr S’ complaint is upheld against the Trustees and to put matters right the Trustees will remit Mr S’ case to a new Occupational Health Physician (OHP) for further consideration.

In addition, the Trustees should pay Mr S £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience caused.

The complaint against JLT is not upheld and no further action is required.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr R’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right the Trustee shall comply promptly with any CETV request that Mr R makes, and offer him a transfer in cash or in specie or a mixture of both, whichever the Trustee considers most appropriate bearing in mind the Plan’s current assets and the amount of the CETV net of any early exit penalty that is applicable to him at that time, as set out in the agreement that Mr R signed in 2013.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs N’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Council shall consider Mrs N’s ill health retirement pension (IHRP) application again.

The Council shall also pay Mrs N £500 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by not following the procedure correctly.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs N’s complaint against the Council is that she has been refused IHRP from deferred status.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The Estate’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right NHS Pensions shall decide  whether or not Mrs E satisfied the tier 1 or tier 2 condition as at the date her employment with Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board (ABMU) ended.

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

Complaint summary

The complaint against NHS Pensions is that it has refused to pay a commuted ill health retirement benefit to the Estate of the late Mrs E.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr E’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right AJ Bell shall carry out a financial loss calculation in order to provide Mr E with fair redress. AJ Bell shall also pay Mr E £500 in recognition of the significant distress and inconvenience he has experienced.

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

Complaint summary

Mr E complains that AJ Bell did not properly process a contribution he made to the SIPP, resulting in a loss of investment opportunity.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right the Trustee shall comply promptly with any CETV request that Mr T makes, and offer him a transfer in cash or in specie or a mixture of both, whichever the Trustee considers most appropriate bearing in mind the Plan’s current assets and the amount of the CETV net of any early exit penalty that is applicable to him at that time, as set out in the agreement that Mr T signed in 2012.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Ms Y has complained that the Trustees have failed to implement her pension sharing order.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against the Trustees because they have not implemented the pension sharing order.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs L’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right NHS BSA shall reconsider Mrs L’s eligibility for PIB.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs L has complained that her application for a Permanent Injury Benefit (PIB) has not been considered in a proper manner.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms Y’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Phoenix should reconsider its decision and inform her of its conclusions, with reasons.

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

Complaint summary

Ms Y’s complaint is that Phoenix rejected her application to receive a share of the death benefits arising from the Plan.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs T’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Zurich should reconsider her application to receive the Plan death benefits and notify her of its decision, with reasons.

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

Complaint summary

Mrs T has complained that Zurich rejected her application to receive the Plan death benefits, following the death of her late husband, Mr T.