LGPS Scotland and Ill Health Retirement

awrightson

Marcon

I did not and the reason is quite simple in that I was unaware it could be requested for whilst still in employment.

Whilst at the ill health capability meeting as soon as it became clear my job was gone it was asked about.

I know I may be clutching at straws here but should my employer not made me aware of it?

Silvertabby

awrightson said:

Silvertabby

Again thank you for your reply.

Occ Health Dr did make me aware that they did not have the final say.

My concern is really focussed on "deferred" at this time.

Can I just check that I am understanding you correctly that you are saying that even though the losing of my job and the requesting of ill health retirement all happened at the same time, during my ill health capability meeting that it would still be classed as deferred? And it is not because the Specialists report arrived after my notice period had finished?

If that is the case would it have made a diiference if I had asked about ill health retirement before the ill health capability meeting took place?

Did my employer not have a duty to make me aware of the option of ill health retirement before the ill health capability meeting took place, given that I had been off work for 12 months?

And finally in your opinion is there any case to be fought for changing it from deferred to normal ill health retirement thus allowing for Tier enhancements to be added?

Apologies for all the questions! And thank you again for your thoughts/help.

Ill health retirements are never black and white.  When your HR told you that they were considering dismissing you on ill health capability (ie, no access to benefits on ill health terms) they should have morally suggested the alternatives to you, but I'm not aware of any legal or LGPS regulation to do so.  But I would have thought that your union rep should have at least considered it?

If you remain dismissed on ill health grounds, or if Occ Health approve payment of benefits from deferral, then of course you can contest either decision and request that you be awarded Tier 1 or 2 from your last day of service. 

But there is no guarantee that you would win - it all depends on your medical condition.  I'm not asking for details, it's just that if your condition is, very broadly, acute rather than chronic, what are the chances of further treatment being able to restore you to health within a reasonable time frame?

That said, payment from deferred status usually covers new conditions that have arisen since the last day of service, which mean that the fund member would be unable to carry out the duties of that (deferred) job.  My own opinion is that if Occ Health have recommended payment from deferred then, in view of the short time span, they should at least consider backdating it to a Tiered payment from live service -  unless they can prove that your condition deteriorated substantially between your date of leaving and the date the payment from deferred was approved.  But that's just my opinion.

awrightson

Silvertabby

Hmm yesi'm a bit baffled as to why I was not advised to the importance of the sequence of events as this could have eaily been brought up prior to the meeting had I known the importance of it happening beforehand. Argh

My condition would not be classed as acute, it would be chronic, and the Occ Health advised "Tier 2 as a minimum" in their letter.

However I got the impression from the Occ Health that the problem may lie with my specialist's report arriving a day after my notice period ended.

If it is to be deferred as HR have suggested do I risk losing that award if I challenge it? Or is it safe regardless of the outcome?

Marcon

awrightson said:

Marcon

I did not and the reason is quite simple in that I was unaware it could be requested for whilst still in employment.

Whilst at the ill health capability meeting as soon as it became clear my job was gone it was asked about.

I know I may be clutching at straws here but should my employer not made me aware of it?

Thank you.

 I've had a look at the relevant Regs for LGPS Scotland https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2018/141/regulation/34

 34.—(1) An active member who has qualifying service for a period of 2 years and whose employment is terminated by a Scheme employer on the grounds of ill-health or infirmity of mind or body before that member reaches normal pension age, is entitled to, and must take, early payment of a retirement pension if that member satisfies the condition in paragraph (3) of this regulation.

(3) The condition is that the member is, as a result of ill-health or infirmity of mind or body, permanently incapable of discharging efficiently the duties of the employment the member was engaged in.

An active member is someone who is currently building up benefits in a scheme - which means you were an active member until your notice period concluded, unless I completely misunderstand the following Reg (@hyubh or @Silvertabby will doubtless correct me if so): 

5.—(1) A person stops being a member in an employment if the person stops being eligible for membership in that employment.

I think there is a strong case for arguing that your employer should have explained your options to you before you were dismissed. I'd write to them and appeal the decision on the grounds:

• you were not aware that you could be considered for ill health early retirement while still in employment
• your employer had not raised the matter with you or suggested it might be possible, even though you had been off sick for a year
• you asked for ill health early retirement as soon as you were aware this was an option (ie at the capability meeting) and before your notice period expired. 

Do not be tempted to quote the Regs just because I have – you are not trying to paint a picture of someone who is well informed on pension matters. You aren’t clued up, which is why you didn’t know you could apply for ill health retirement.

 If that doesn’t change things, you could use the scheme’s Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure, but a better and almost certainly quicker alternative is this: https://www.pensions-ombudsman.org.uk/sites/default/files/publication/files/Early%20Resolution%20Service%20March%202022.pdf

Silvertabby

awrightson said:

Silvertabby

Hmm yesi'm a bit baffled as to why I was not advised to the importance of the sequence of events as this could have eaily been brought up prior to the meeting had I known the importance of it happening beforehand. Argh

My condition would not be classed as acute, it would be chronic, and the Occ Health advised "Tier 2 as a minimum" in their letter.

However I got the impression from the Occ Health that the problem may lie with my specialist's report arriving a day after my notice period ended.

If it is to be deferred as HR have suggested do I risk losing that award if I challenge it? Or is it safe regardless of the outcome?

In view of the time scale, and the Occ Health recommendation, this does need pushing back to HR.  With a formal complaint, if necessary.  1 day 'late'....really?  

hyubh

awrightson said:

The "Specilist" was a NHS Consultant who had nothing to do with the ill health retirement. It was him who was contacted by Occupational Health for further information and ask if there was any diagnosis.

I am not entirely what you mean by "if employer is the administering authority" but I would say they probably would be.

It is my employer who has informed me that it is to be a "deferred" pension and just waiting to hear more about what that exactly means. Have looked online and seen it suggested "deferred" meant there wwould be no enhancements paid for whatever Tier you may be placed in, you would just get the pension you had accrued.

You have given me a glimmer of hope though, thank you.

A 'deferred' pension in this context just means one where you are no longer an active member of the scheme, but have not yet drawn the pension. As you have found, ill health retirements from deferred don't have the tiers like ones from active do.

According to the LGPS regs an ill health retirement from active is a decision for the employer, after taking advice from an IRMP, i.e. not just any 'specialist' but one registered for assessing LGPS ill health claims. An ill health retirement from deferred however is a decision for the administering authority (also after taking advice from an IRMP). I'll be honest, reading your followups I'm now wondering if you were actually being assessed for an ill health retirement, or just ending your employment. As Silvertabby says, they are different things.

The 'administering authority' is the council (*) that runs the pension fund. So, for example, the administering authority of Strathclyde Pension Fund is Glasgow City Council. While the administering authority will itself be an employer in the fund, the fund will have lots of other employers too. For a smaller fund especially it may be the case that ill health retirement requests for both the council as the administering authority and the council as an employer might be assessed by the same individual(s). However in various other cases it won't be, i.e. it would not be HR's decision for whether a request for an ill health pension pension from deferred should be accepted or not.

(*) With a few exceptions in England.

awrightson

Hyubh, Silvertabby and Marcon again thank you for your thoughts and advice on this.

Although the Occ Health Dr inferred I may face issues becasue of the "day late" letter I have know way of knowing if this was merely their opinion or factual knowledge, as yet, I had really hoped to find that out today but nothing as yet. So I suppose it is possible that it is not beacuse of that, but rather because of when it was requested for during the ill health capability meeting.

On that note though and referring to Marcon's earler message with the regs saying "An active member is someone who is currently building up benefits in a scheme" Although I was given my notice period on that day would I not still be an active member, as my contributions were still being paid for the 3 months notice period? If so, would that bring it back to the "late letter" as the reason for it being deferred? Or is that nonsense!

Hyubh I most definitely was not being assessed for ill health retirement as it was me who asked about it, and there seemed to be a great deal of surprise when I asked,  as they all left the room for sometime to discuss out of earshot.

Happy to clarify anything that I haven't explained clearly and just to add I really appreciate all your help/thoughts/advice with this matter.

Marcon

awrightson said:

Hyubh, Silvertabby and Marcon again thank you for your thoughts and advice on this.

Although the Occ Health Dr inferred I may face issues becasue of the "day late" letter I have know way of knowing if this was merely their opinion or factual knowledge, as yet, I had really hoped to find that out today but nothing as yet. So I suppose it is possible that it is not beacuse of that, but rather because of when it was requested for during the ill health capability meeting.

On that note though and referring to Marcon's earler message with the regs saying "An active member is someone who is currently building up benefits in a scheme" Although I was given my notice period on that day would I not still be an active member, as my contributions were still being paid for the 3 months notice period? If so, would that bring it back to the "late letter" as the reason for it being deferred? Or is that nonsense!

Hyubh I most definitely was not being assessed for ill health retirement as it was me who asked about it, and there seemed to be a great deal of surprise when I asked,  as they all left the room for sometime to discuss out of earshot.

Happy to clarify anything that I haven't explained clearly and just to add I really appreciate all your help/thoughts/advice with this matter.

....and that sentence says it all. 

Get on and appeal.

Silvertabby

Marcon said:

awrightson said:

Hyubh, Silvertabby and Marcon again thank you for your thoughts and advice on this.

Although the Occ Health Dr inferred I may face issues becasue of the "day late" letter I have know way of knowing if this was merely their opinion or factual knowledge, as yet, I had really hoped to find that out today but nothing as yet. So I suppose it is possible that it is not beacuse of that, but rather because of when it was requested for during the ill health capability meeting.

On that note though and referring to Marcon's earler message with the regs saying "An active member is someone who is currently building up benefits in a scheme" Although I was given my notice period on that day would I not still be an active member, as my contributions were still being paid for the 3 months notice period? If so, would that bring it back to the "late letter" as the reason for it being deferred? Or is that nonsense!

Hyubh I most definitely was not being assessed for ill health retirement as it was me who asked about it, and there seemed to be a great deal of surprise when I asked,  as they all left the room for sometime to discuss out of earshot.

Happy to clarify anything that I haven't explained clearly and just to add I really appreciate all your help/thoughts/advice with this matter.

....and that sentence says it all. 

Get on and appeal.

Ditto.  This 'late letter' thing is just nonsense.

awrightson

Noted, will keep you posted on what happens, thanks to everyone who commented.