pension calculation error

RichandJ

renege wrote: »

Thanks for your feedback. I will share the details when I receive them from the administrators.
Interesting comment - that in this instance it is ethically ok for a bank to provide incorrect financial information to a customer on which they are to base their financial future.

Afraid ethics don't come into it, the Trustees of the Scheme have a legal duty to administer the Scheme in accordance with the Trust Deed & Rules. If you're being overpaid, even due to an error by their appointed administrators, then they have to put that right.

Don't get me wrong, I sympathise with your position & always try to remember when doing calcs that it's important to be as accurate as possible as people may be making life decisions based on the figures I provide. Unfortunately this attitude is, let's say, not universal partly due to the reasons in my semi rant above.

By the way, if you're not getting anywhere with the administrator ask about the scheme's Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure - they are required to have one.

agrinnall

My reason for asking if it was DB and normal retirement at 60 is that it should be very easy for you to work out yourself what your pension would have been had you waited until 60 - (number of years service / however many years for full pension) X final salary. So for example, (25 years service / 60 for full pension) X £30,000 final salary = £12,500 pension. The only complexity might be if the final salary is actually averaged over a few years, but even so you should be able to work out a ballpark figure.

maggieann155

was this a 'final, guaranteed' figure? if so, shouldn' t the company pay the extra funds into the pension scheme to enable the payments to continue at the 'guaranteed' rate. surely some one is accountable? the company ?
my husband is expecting his final, guaranteed figures any day now. he is due to retire on 3rd march. i know that the admin company have done the calcs, the calcs checked by some one else in that dept, and then it is being sent to the company for authorisation. i would expect that this would be the final , unchangeable amount even if a mistake has been made. am i expecting too much ??!!

molerat

I am afraid you are. RichandJ summed it up quite clearly

RichandJ wrote: »

.............. the Trustees of the Scheme have a legal duty to administer the Scheme in accordance with the Trust Deed & Rules. If you're being overpaid, even due to an error by their appointed administrators, then they have to put that right..................

CLAPTON

maggieann155 wrote: »

was this a 'final, guaranteed' figure? if so, shouldn' t the company pay the extra funds into the pension scheme to enable the payments to continue at the 'guaranteed' rate. surely some one is accountable? the company ?
my husband is expecting his final, guaranteed figures any day now. he is due to retire on 3rd march. i know that the admin company have done the calcs, the calcs checked by some one else in that dept, and then it is being sent to the company for authorisation. i would expect that this would be the final , unchangeable amount even if a mistake has been made. am i expecting too much ??!!

so if a mistake was made and the figure was too low, you would be prepared to accept it without redress?

maggieann155

probably not ! lol.
but if 3 different people have checked the figures and a mistake is still made surely some one should be accountable .

CLAPTON

maggieann155 wrote: »

probably not ! lol.
but if 3 different people have checked the figures and a mistake is still made surely some one should be accountable .

accountable yes of course but what about

'the final , unchangeable amount even if a mistake has been made. am i expecting too much '

if it was to your disadvantage?

RichandJ

maggieann155 wrote: »

probably not ! lol.
but if 3 different people have checked the figures and a mistake is still made surely some one should be accountable .

They should, but in an internal, possibly disciplinary, way. As I said above, the fact that a mistake has been made means that, if it is found, it has to be put right and that's from both perspectives, underpayment as well as overpayment.

There is no issue of 'compensation' here. The Trustees must treat all members of the Scheme in the same way - if a mistake was found and not corrected that would breach that duty.

It is possible to bring a claim of maladministration via the Regulator or Ombudsman (can't recall which at the mo) but if a corrected pension is found to be right then there is no redress against the Scheme/Trustees.

You just have to hope you have a numerate, literate administrator doing your figures.

hugheskevi

My reason for asking if it was DB and normal retirement at 60 is that it should be very easy for you to work out yourself what your pension would have been had you waited until 60 - (number of years service / however many years for full pension) X final salary. So for example, (25 years service / 60 for full pension) X £30,000 final salary = £12,500 pension. The only complexity might be if the final salary is actually averaged over a few years, but even so you should be able to work out a ballpark figure.

I can foresee a few other complexities...

• Perhaps the scheme has equalised benefits to account for GMPs due to equal treatment rules
• Maybe it was a deferred pension, and GMP element had different revaluation to rest of scheme benefits
• Maybe the scheme changed NRA in response to Barber judgement in 1990, meaning there were different tranches of benefit payable, of which at least one was actuarially adjusted for early/late payment
• Perhaps the scheme made other changes to scheme rules resulting in different tranches of benefit
• Maybe pensionable pay was capped, or benefits were not based on total salary (eg, integrated schemes)
• Perhaps some of the benefit included used of a longevity adjustment factor

Those are just a few thoughts off the top of my head - changes in scheme rules and legislative meddling down the years can make it effectively impossible for an individual to calculate what their DB benefits should be in some schemes. You can get fairly close, but not exact.

I can understand the frustration, particularly for someone who has been diligent in checking statements down the years and reporting any inaccuracies.

property.advert

I may well have just gone on he sick for 4 months and simply retired on my due retirement date rather than upset the apple cart so late in the day !