Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N’s complaint is that Hornbuckle unfairly increased exsting fees and applied new fees (non-block insurance risk premium and self managed risk premium) for the year 2014/15.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y’s complaint is about the legal fees charged by Morton Fraser, who are on Hornbuckle’s panel of solicitors, in relation to the preparation of a lease for a property held within the SIPP. Mr Y says that Hornbuckle should instead have accepted the quotation which he had obtained from another firm of solicitors, Sophie Wagner.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N’s complaint against Royal London is about an early exit charge which will be applied to the Plan if he transfers his benefits away from the Scheme more than five years before his selected retirement date.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr N is unhappy with the administration fees AJ Bell has charged the SIPP. He says that his transfer value should not be reduced to pay for the scheme sanction charges (SSC) plus the interest accrued. Mr N also says:-

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr Y made a complaint in three parts following the full surrender of his policies in the Scheme. He said:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr E has complained that the value of his policy within the Scheme was surrendered at zero, due to charges continuously being deducted, when he was no longer paying contributions into the Scheme.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by Royal London.

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

Complaint summary

Mr S is complaining about a charge of 0.1% that will be applied to a single contribution to the Plan for making a payment without the use of an independent financial advisor (IFA).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Complaint summary

Mr H’s complaint is about the fees he was charged when transferring his pension fund from Suffolk Life to Interactive Investor. Mr H is dissatisfied as he was charged £1,485.00 for the transfer and was not informed of the charge by Suffolk Life.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

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

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr S’ complaint and no further action is required by Abbey Life.

Complaint summary

Mr S has complained that Abbey Life is applying an unreasonable early exit charge to the benefits he would like to transfer out of the Plan.