Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr D’s complaint is in two parts. His first complaint concerns the system NHS BSA has in place to notify him of the donations he makes to charity through the Payroll Giving Service (Payroll Giving). He is dissatisfied that he does not receive regular notifications of the payments made on his behalf so that he can keep up to date with the donations he has made, (Complaint 1).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs S’ complaint and no further action is required by SPPA.

Complaint summary

Mrs S’ complaint against SPPA concerns its decision not to award her an ill health early retirement pension (IHER).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by the Trustee or JLT.

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that he was provided with an incorrect transfer value. He also believes the general administration of the Scheme has been poor.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained that his benefits were not correctly increased in the year before he took benefits. He considers that the pension should have been increased by the Retail Prices Index (RPI) on a pro rata basis until the date of his retirement.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mrs A disagrees with RLMISL’s position that she has no entitlement left within the Scheme. RLMISL said that Mrs A received a refund of contributions when she left the Scheme. Mrs A said that she never received this.

As a result, Mrs A would like to be compensated for the losses and/or for the non-payment of the pension that was due to her.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr A’s complaint is as follows:-

Communications in respect of the OBSPS were misleading and scaremongering.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr D’s complaint is as follows:-

Communications in respect of the OBSPS were misleading and amounted to scaremongering.

The cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) paid to his chosen receiving scheme is not an accurate representation of his benefits within the OBSPS.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr G’s complaint is as follows:-

Communications in respect of the OBSPS were misleading and scaremongering;

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr S’ complaint is as follows:-

The information that was available; the uncertainty of the OBSPS’, and TSUK’s future, prompted him to transfer.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

The complaint should not be upheld because Mrs Y did not fulfil the scheme criteria for payment of a spouse’s pension and the Trustee’s decision making process regarding Mrs Y’s request for payment of a discretionary benefit was reasonable.

Complaint Summary

Mrs Y’s complaint concerns the Trustee’s decision not to award her a spouse’s pension, even though her late husband, Mr Y nominated her in an Expression of Wish Form (the Form).