Personal Pension  

When liberation does not mean freedom

The ombudsman recognised that Mr X’s request to transfer out did not strictly meet the statutory requirements as it did not provide details of the receiving scheme. However, the ombudsman concluded that the administrator’s failure to respond to his transfer request was “undoubtedly maladministration” and that Mr X would have identified the receiving scheme if he had not been ignored.

The ombudsman ordered that the administrator of the Capita Oak Scheme provide the higher of the transfer value backdated to September 2013 with interest and the current transfer value. Although Mr X could seek to enforce the ombudsman’s direction in court, the ombudsman noted that, sadly, some or all of Mr X’s money may no longer be available.

Article continues after advert

Danny Tsang is a partner at City law firm Simmons & Simmons