Complaint summary

Mr Crossland complains that Omni has refused to act on his request to transfer his benefits out of the Henley Retirement Benefit Scheme (the Henley Scheme).

Complaint summary

Mr Hughes complains that, following his application, Aviva transferred his pension to the Capita Oak Pension Scheme without sufficient checks on the receiving scheme and he is now unable to locate his pension fund.

Complaint summary

Mr Powell complains that, following his application, Prudential transferred his pension to the Dataspec Pension Scheme without sufficient checks on the receiving scheme and he is now unable to locate his pension fund.

Complaint summary

Miss Hughes complains that Royal London refused to act on her request to transfer her benefits from her personal pension plan to the Babbacombe Road 1973 Limited SSAS.

Complaint summary

Mr Johnston complains that, following his application, Prudential transferred his pension to the Capita Oak Pension Scheme without sufficient checks on the receiving scheme and he is now unable to locate his pension fund.

Complaint summary

Miss Owen complains that AC Management has refused to act on her request to transfer her benefits out of the Fixed Income Retirement Plan (the Plan).

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

I do not uphold Mr T’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 T has complained that, following his application, Royal London transferred his pension to the Capita Oak Pension Scheme without sufficient checks on the receiving scheme and he is now unable to locate his pension fund.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Complaint Summary

Mr N complains that Kuhrt Leach LLP failed to respond to his enquiries about his Scheme benefits, leaving him unable to plan for his future, access his Scheme benefits or exercise his transfer rights.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

The complaint should be upheld against Kuhrt Leach LLP because they failed to respond to Mr N over a prolonged period of time, regarding his Scheme benefits. This constitutes maladministration, which has caused him significant distress and inconvenience.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr T’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Mr T’s questions regarding the funds in the Policy, including the current value, and to assist him in exercising his statutory right to a transfer.  Fast Pensions should also pay Mr T £1,000, to reflect the distress and inconvenience caused to him by their maladministration.

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

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms T complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Ms T’s questions regarding the status and security of the Plan, including the current value, and assist her in exercising her statutory right to a transfer if she so wishes.

Fast Pensions should also pay Ms T, £1,000, to reflect the significant distress and inconvenience caused to her by their maladministration.

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