Local Government Pension Scheme · CAS-55734-B7S2

CAS-55734-B7S2

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mrs R

Scheme Local Government Pension Scheme (the Scheme)

Respondent Tower Hamlets Council (the Council)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties

“1.-(3) These Regulations shall come into force on 5th December 2005, but the amendments made by regulation 3 shall have effect from 1st April 1998…

3.-(1) The Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 1997(1) shall be amended in accordance with this regulation...

1 CAS-55734-B7S2

(SI2005/3069)

(SI2004/573)

regulation 40 41

2 CAS-55734-B7S2

3 CAS-55734-B7S2

4 CAS-55734-B7S2

5 CAS-55734-B7S2 Adjudicator’s Opinion

• In addition to the misinformation provided in the letter of 3 January 2019, the Council quoted an incorrect short-term widower’s pension in the February 2019

6 CAS-55734-B7S2 Quotation. The Council subsequently failed to respond following Mrs R’s complaint under the IDRP.

• In the Adjudicator’s opinion these issues amount to maladministration by the Council, which would have caused Mrs R significant distress and inconvenience. So, the Council should offer Mrs R an award of £500 in keeping with the Ombudsman’s guidance for non-financial injustice of this type.

The Council accepted the Adjudicator’s Opinion, Mrs R did not, and the complaint was passed to me to consider. I have considered the additional points raised by Mrs R, but I agree with the Adjudicator’s Opinion except in respect of the non-financial award.

Mrs R’s additional comments

The 2005 Amendment Regulations only changed the Scheme regarding any death benefits that would be payable when a member had a civil partnership and predeceased their partner.

The death benefits quoted in the Employee’s Guide and the 1999 Statement were not correct at the time they were provided, as they did not reflect the 1997 Regulations that came into force on 1 April 1998.

The Council failed to recognise the Employee’s Guide and did not respond to her complaint under the IDRP. So, a £500 award is insufficient recognition of the distress and inconvenience she has suffered.

Ombudsman’s decision

7 CAS-55734-B7S2

Mrs R said that the Council failed to recognise the Employee’s Guide and did not respond to her complaint under the IDRP. She said that a £500 award is insufficient recognition of the resulting distress and inconvenience she has suffered. I note that there was a period of over 20 years between June 1998 when Mrs R says she received the Employee’s Guide and 26 March 2019, when she enquired about it to the Council. Due to this lengthy passage of time, it is not unreasonable that the Council would not have a copy or knowledge of that version of the Employee’s Guide. Ultimately, the Council is, in any event, required to act in accordance with the current Scheme Regulations which always take primacy over any other Scheme literature.

Although, the Council failed to respond to Mrs R’s complaint under the IDRP, the email of 29 March 2019 had previously explained that the Scheme Regulations regarding a spouse’s pension had changed, and that a long-term widower’s pension, equal to half of Mrs R’s retirement pension, would not be payable in the event that she predeceased her husband. The Council’s subsequent email of 29 May 2019 was consistent on this point since it correctly quoted a long-term widower’s pension in accordance with the 1997 Scheme Regulations, as amended by the 2005 Amendment Regulations.

However, I find that, in addition to incorrect information being given on two occasions by the Council, it then failed to respond fully to Mrs R’s complaint under its own IDRP. Mrs R will, undoubtedly have suffered serious distress and inconvenience as a consequence, so I find that £1,000 is an appropriate award in the circumstances of this case.

I partly uphold Mrs R’s complaint.

Directions

Anthony Arter CBE

Deputy Pensions Ombudsman 10 November 2023

8 CAS-55734-B7S2 Appendix The 1995 Regulations that governed the Scheme before the 1997 Scheme Regulations states:

Pensioner’s spouse’s short-term pension

F4.—(1) Subject to regulations F7 (remarriage and cohabitation) and G8(3), if a person who—

(a) was entitled to receive payments in respect of a retirement pension (other than a pension under regulation D19), or

(b) would have been so entitled but for regulation H6 (commutation in exceptional circumstances of ill-health) or Part I of Schedule D5 (re-employed pensioners),

dies leaving a surviving spouse or spouses, that spouse is entitled or, as the case may be, they are jointly entitled to a spouse’s short-term pension—

(i) if the spouse has one or more eligible children in his or her care, for six months after the deceased’s death, or

(ii) otherwise for three months after the deceased’s death.

(2) Subject to regulation F6 (post retirement marriages), where paragraph (1) applies, the annual rate of the short-term pension is a rate equal to the spouse’s retirement pension immediately before the date of death or the rate it would have been at that date apart from any payment under regulation H6 or the operation of Part I of Schedule D5.

Pensioner’s spouse’s long-term pension

F5.—(1) Subject to regulation F7 (remarriage and cohabitation), where regulation F4(1) applies the surviving spouse is entitled or, as the case may be, the surviving spouses are jointly entitled, at the end of the period in respect of which a short-term pension is payable under that regulation, to a spouse’s long-term pension.

(2) Subject to regulation F6 (post retirement marriages), where paragraph (1) applies and any new employment for the purposes of Part I of Schedule D5 (re-employed pensioners) was not a local government employment, the annual rate of the long-term pension is half the annual rate of the deceased’s retirement pension immediately before the date of death.

9