We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Pension redress

Hello
I would like to know if anybody on here has under gone a pension redress calculation and then successfully challenged it when it was found to have been fraudulent to avoid payment of redress. My partner has decided she wants to challenge a calculation  completed via conguent software. I know there are many cases of ifas using this software and incorrectly calculating the redress figures, has this happened to anyone on here and if so what steps did you take to rectify the issue.

Comments

  • sandsy
    sandsy Posts: 1,759 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    What makes you think the calculation is not correct? 

    You should receive a report that shows all of the information that was used in the calculation (the inputs). Are any of the inputs obviously wrong? If not, what else is it that makes you think it is wrong?

    Presume this is for a pension transfer from defined benefit to defined contribution? Many pension transfer redress calculations are coming out as low/zero at the moment due to the economic conditions.

    You might find it helpful to read this:

    https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/pension-transfer-defined-benefit/redress-calculations

  • She is aware of all the facts. However the calculation failed to include numerous benefits which were well known and would have resulted in redress.
  • Marcon
    Marcon Posts: 15,594 Forumite
    Ninth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    edited 16 January 2025 at 8:31AM
    notabot66 said:
    She is aware of all the facts. However the calculation failed to include numerous benefits which were well known and would have resulted in redress.
    'Well known' is not the same thing as 'in the rules of the scheme in question'. Do you mean discretionary benefits?  Could you give a couple of examples of these 'numerous well known benefits' please?
    Googling on your question might have been both quicker and easier, if you're only after simple facts rather than opinions!  
  • No,
    They were benefits confirmed by both the trustees and actuary who manages the scheme.
  • It was a deliberate action to avoid payment. It is not an unusual tactic by unscrupulous ifas.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 353.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 602.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.1K Life & Family
  • 260.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.