Retired over 6 years ago.....

hugheskevi

This employer guidance is relevant.

Retrospective consideration is not normally given, but can be where:

This will include situations where the employer or Scheme Medical Adviser has made an error or omission in handling the individual's exit.  This might be, for example, where the employer failed to consider IHR for an individual when it is clear that it should have been considered or where the individual resigned or was dismissed for reasons connected with health but was not made aware of their right to apply for ill health retirement. RIHR is therefore a form of redress for errors or omissions, not a right that an individual retains after they have left.

Jonson1 said:

he was in the classic pension scheme and not the newer ones....

 As outlined in "The Public Service (Civil Servants and Others) Pensions (Amendment) Regulations 2015," 

If he was a protected classic member (classic is part of the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme), the CSOPS regulations are irrelevant, unless you want to make a contingent decision that he did not apply under classic but would have applied if he had been a member of alpha.

Jonson1 said:

Despite all these accommodations and the support of his coworkers, the progressive nature of this inherited eye disorder Stargardt disease made it impossible for him to continue working, even in a modified role, consequently he retired on  xxxxxx at the age of 62, not fully revealing his inabilities due to his pride and his perceived stigma.

Consequently, he hid his vulnerabilities from others, avoided social situations where he might be exposed, continued to take on tasks that were in reality beyond his capabilities, and refused to fully seek the help or support he needed.

This does not point toward any error on behalf of the employer, if he hid the extent of his ailment from everyone.

Jonson1

Thank you for everyone's advice and helpful information. To add, his line manager realised there was a problem and "helped" him to continue working; however, in hindsight, this was not helpful, was it? Also, he was in CSOPS.

mybestattempt

I maybe wrong but I thought the NPA for Classic is/was 60, so a person retiring at 62 would not have been entitled to IHR in any event.

Marcon

Jonson1 said:

Thank you for everyone's advice and helpful information. To add, his line manager realised there was a problem and "helped" him to continue working; however, in hindsight, this was not helpful, was it? 

It was fantastically helpful and a splendid example of a good, caring manager. Their actions enabled your friend to have the dignity of continuing to work and continue to earn his full salary - which would have been very considerably higher than any ill health pension.

mybestattempt said:

I maybe wrong but I thought the NPA for Classic is/was 60, so a person retiring at 62 would not have been entitled to IHR in any event.

You are entirely correct that NPA is 60...I think this whole thread is based on a total misunderstanding of how (and when) ill health retirement pensions can be paid.

If the individual concerned deliberately chose not to apply, for their own reasons, they can't turn round years later and complain they should have been awarded an ill health pension. If he tried to suggest now that he would have applied if he had been a member of alpha is clearly a nonsense (although there's no suggestion that is being argued), when the reason for not applying was pride/a wish to conceal his health issues. That is key.

I don't think OP is prepared to listen to anyone here, so maybe just let them get on, apply on the friend's behalf, and we can all close this thread.

hugheskevi

Jonson1 said:

Thank you for everyone's advice and helpful information. To add, his line manager realised there was a problem and "helped" him to continue working; however, in hindsight, this was not helpful, was it? Also, he was in CSOPS.

But in your post of 8:05pm you said:

Jonson1 said:

sorry, about going about this in a piecemeal approach, he was in the classic pension scheme and not the newer ones. 

So which was it? Classic, which is part of the PCSPS or alpha, which is part of CSOPS?

You say he was aged 62 and that was over 6 years ago. So aged 62 in 2018. That suggests he was 56 in 2012, and so a protected classic member when the change to alpha took place. This would mean he was still a classic member when he left.

mybestattempt said:

I maybe wrong but I thought the NPA for Classic is/was 60, so a person retiring at 62 would not have been entitled to IHR in any event.

The classic NPA is 60, but I think members can still get an ill-health enhancement if they suffer ill-health between 60-65. I think the individual would get 3 extra years of service with a successful ill-health application. Classic works differently to the other Civil Service schemes, with the other schemes just paying an unreduced pension immediately in the event of ill-health (and an enhanced pension in the event of serious ill health).

Marcon

hugheskevi said:

Jonson1 said:

Thank you for everyone's advice and helpful information. To add, his line manager realised there was a problem and "helped" him to continue working; however, in hindsight, this was not helpful, was it? Also, he was in CSOPS.

But in your post of 8:05pm you said:

Jonson1 said:

sorry, about going about this in a piecemeal approach, he was in the classic pension scheme and not the newer ones. 

So which was it? Classic, which is part of the PCSPS or alpha, which is part of CSOPS?

You say he was aged 62 and that was over 6 years ago. So aged 62 in 2018. That suggests he was 56 in 2012, and so a protected classic member when the change to alpha took place. This would mean he was still a classic member when he left.

mybestattempt said:

I maybe wrong but I thought the NPA for Classic is/was 60, so a person retiring at 62 would not have been entitled to IHR in any event.

The classic NPA is 60, but I think members can still get an ill-health enhancement if they suffer ill-health between 60-65. I think the individual would get 3 extra years of service with a successful ill-health application. Classic works differently to the other Civil Service schemes, with the other schemes just paying an unreduced pension immediately in the event of ill-health (and an enhanced pension in the event of serious ill health).

You're right as usual. They can, and assuming at least 10 years of reckonable service:

Method A
Your reckonable service is increased

to 20 years, or, if it is less, to the amount you would have built up if you had worked until five years after pension age.

Method B
Your reckonable service is increased

by 6 2/3 years, or, if it is less, to the amount you would have built up by pension age.

BUT...there's the little matter of actually applying for ill health retirement, which OP's chum didn't want to do, so the whole argument fails purely on that basis.

Jonson1

Just to say thank you all for the help and advise, I am very grateful for this, and I am sorry for all the mistakes made while trying to give you the information, but i have been writing this on behalf of someone else, and therefore confusion arose, just one thing before i close he was a member of the PCSPS up until the day he retired. Once again thanks you all, and by the looks of it, it was his decision and therefore he has to live with that. Once again thank you. 

Marcon

Jonson1 said:

Just to say thank you all for the help and advise, I am very grateful for this, and I am sorry for all the mistakes made while trying to give you the information, but i have been writing this on behalf of someone else, and therefore confusion arose, just one thing before i close he was a member of the PCSPS up until the day he retired. Once again thanks you all, and by the looks of it, it was his decision and therefore he has to live with that. Once again thank you. 

Send the letter (and supporting documents) you've drafted. You've nothing to lose by doing so, although for the reasons explained in this thread, I don't think you have anything to gain - but sending it will close off what might otherwise become a niggling sense of 'what if...'.