Ombudsman’s Determination

I do not uphold Mr T’s complaint and no further action is required by MyCSP or the Employer.

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

Complaint summary

Mr T’s complaint is that his employer failed to provide clear, full and timely information about his transfer options in relation to his accrued pension benefits, around the time of a bulk pension transfer in 2016. As a result, he was denied the opportunity to make an informed decision about whether to take part in the transfer.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N complains that RPMI improperly transferred the pension benefits available to him from the BTPFSF into the West Midlands Pension Fund (WMPF) in April 1993 because it had failed to supply him with details of the transfer value (TV) which he had requested before proceeding.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr L’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustee.

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

Complaint summary

Mr L’s complaint against the Trustee is that it mishandled his application to transfer out of the Plan. He says that this caused him to suffer a financial loss of £121,768.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr R is unhappy that Equiniti understated the tax due for a transfer to a qualifying recognised overseas pension scheme (QROPS). Further, he is unhappy with Equiniti’s timing in notifying him of the error, which he says left him in a position where he was unable to make an informed decision about whether to transfer all of his accrued funds directly to a QROPS or to a self-invested personal pension (SIPP) instead.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mrs Y’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustee or Mercer.

Complaint summary

Mrs Y has complained that the transfer value she received in March 2017, was significantly lower than the transfer value she received in March 2016.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr R’s complaint and no further action is required by AJ Bell.

Complaint Summary

Mr R’s complaint is about the time taken by AJ Bell to issue correspondence to his Investment Manager and that this delay has resulted in a financial loss.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Dr Y’s complaint and no further action is required by the Trustee.

Complaint summary

Dr Y has complained that his Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV) is too low. He says:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr I’s complaint against the Trustee is in three parts:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

Complaint summary

Mr N complains that the cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) he received from the Trustee was incorrect. He believes the CETV should have been based on the enhanced figure he was offered as a result of his serious ill health. He would like the Trustee to pay the difference.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr L’s complaint against the Trustee.

Mr L’s complaint against the Company is partly upheld, but there is a part of the complaint I do not agree with. To put matters right (for the part that is upheld), the Company will pay £500 to Mr L to recognise the significant distress and inconvenience it has caused him.

Complaint summary

Mr L’s complaint is that the Company did not permit him to take an unreduced Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV).