trivial payment

It wasn't made clear to me when I took out the pension that I couldn't have a lump sum payment if I was already in receipt of my voluntary part of the plan.

I have seen CIS pension paperwork and they do explain the triviality rules.

What use is that when my utilities are £157 a month.

These things are only as good as what you pay in. if you pay in peanuts, you get back peanuts.

I took my case to the financial ombudsmen, but the adjudicator found in favour of cis, so I have referred it to the ombudsmen.

The ombudsman overturn rate is around 11% on adjudicator decisions. So, dont hold your breath. Plus, if you didnt seek advice, then you should not expect advice standards. All CIS need to do is comply with scheme rules and supply information you ask along with the basic information they automatically give.

Can anyone help with advice?

You needed advice when you took the first pension. Asking for advice now is a bit late. However, we can probably explain the reasons why rather than give you an outcome. Answer Your Hero's questions above to give us the information we need.

fiesta1950 wrote: »

I am 63 & applied Dec 2013 for a triviality payment. It is a private pension and the other one I receive ,voluntary contributions fund is worth £8000 & the contracting out part is worth £8500 .It is not avc.

So what retirement options does the CIS say you have with this 'private pension' (there are many many types of private pensions but let's forget that for a second)? Please try not to paraphrase what you think they may have said. Just type it out verbatim as stated on your claim pack.

The problem I have is that I wasn't told when I took it out that I couldn't claim it all as a lump sum.This is why I took it to the ombudsmen.

What did the adviser say?
Or did you bypass an adviser and go DIY instead?

So are you actually saying that you have taken an annuity with CIS but that you are now trying to get the fund paid out as a lump sum instead?

If so the money has already been used to purchase an annuity. This is where the £36.99 comes from.

My interpretation is that there are 2 pots. One of these pots is currently being paid. Because you are receiving an annuity from the scheme, they've said you cant take the other pot as a lump sum and have given you an annuity quote of £37 per month. Is my interpretation correct?

Believe it or not, you may in fact have a case BUT you would need a copy of the original information from when you joined the scheme.

Legislation states that in order to qualify for a trivial commutation payment, the payment must extinguish all rights to the scheme.

This criteria may not have been well communicated. If it wasn't well communicated AND this specific "extinguishing" criteria is their only reason for their refusal to pay the money as a trivial commutation payment AND the terms and conditions of the scheme aren't clear on the trivial commutation rules of the scheme in relation to the "extinguishing" point, then you might have actually have a case.

HMRC rules state that if the scheme were to give you the money as cash despite you having an ongoing annuity with them bought from a different pot, a cash lump sum payment wouldn't be treated as an unauthorised payment (subject to various conditions, basically in line with trivial commutation rules with a few other ones) http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/rpsmmanual/rpsm09105460.htm. A scheme doesn't have to do this, hence why the T&Cs are important.

To put it another way, if the scheme t&cs don't specifically state anything about the extinguishing rule AND the communications implied that you would be able to take the money as a cash lump sum if below the limits and didn't specify or explain the the extinguishing point, then there is a strong argument that the scheme should pay it to you under the HMRC rule above.

However, with all that said, I've made a huge number of assumptions in this post, which may or may not be correct and it is not a substitute for legal advice. I am not a lawyer.