Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr D’s complaint and no further action is required by Fidelity or Friends Life.

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

Complaint summary

Mr D has complained that an incorrect amount was transferred to Fidelity against his wishes. Mr D has also complained that in order to raise this incorrect amount, Friends Life had to sell units that Mr D had expressly wanted to remain invested with Friends Life.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr P has complained that Broadstone reassured him that his pension would not be affected by the transfer of the WS Cowell Scheme into the Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS). His FAS assistance is less than the pension he was being paid from the WS Cowell Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr T’s complaint and no further action is required by Accenture (UK) Limited.

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

Complaint summary

Mr T’s complaint about WTW, the administrators of the Plan, is that it took too long to complete the transfer of his benefits out of the Plan, and that the transfer process is inadequate.

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

I do not uphold Mr T’s complaint and no further action is required by Standard Life.

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

Complaint summary

Mr T has complained because he believes Standard Life, the administrator for the Plan, did not pay a transfer amount to him, or an alternative scheme, in 2006. Mr T has also complained about the time Standard Life took to deal with his complaint.

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

I do not uphold Mr L’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 L’s complaint is that Aviva reduced his loyalty bonus when he transferred his pension to a new pension provider.

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

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N has complained that AXA failed to make sure his transfer documents were received by Barclays (the Ceding Scheme) in time to meet the guaranteed transfer value deadline.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr R’s complaint against the LPFA is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint that I do not agree with. To put matters right for the part that is upheld the LPFA shall pay Mr R £1,000.

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