Nest · CAS-112570-K9X9

CAS-112570-K9X9

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Miss N

Scheme NEST (the Scheme)

Respondent Gaudium Ltd (the Employer)

Outcome

Complaint summary Miss N has complained that the Employer, has failed to pay employer pension contributions into the Scheme.

Background information, including submissions from the parties

In 2012, Miss N began her employment with the Employer.

Between January 2022 and September 2023, the Employer failed to pay pension contributions into the Scheme.

On 21 October 2023, Miss N brought her complaint to The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO).

Miss N provided copies of the payslips that she held for the period from January 2022 to September 2023, which detailed the pension contributions deducted from her pay and the corresponding employer contributions. These deductions amounted to £1137.77 in employee contributions and £895.38 in employer contributions. A breakdown of the deductions has been included in the Appendix. CAS-112570-K9X9

On 27 March 2024, Miss N received an Employment Tribunal decision in her favour against the Employer. The Employment Tribunal concluded that the Employer had failed to pay employee contributions in the amount of £1,397.17. It ordered the employer to pay this to Miss N. The Employment Tribunal did not cover the employer contributions which had also not been paid to the Scheme.

Adjudicator’s Opinion

• The Adjudicator stated that TPO’s normal approach, in cases such as these, was to seek agreement from all parties on the facts of the complaint, including the dates and amounts of contributions involved. She said that, as the Employer had not responded to any of TPO’s communications, she had to base her Opinion solely on the information provided by Miss N.

• The Adjudicator said that she had no reason to doubt the information provided by Miss N. So, in the Adjudicator’s Opinion, on the balance of probabilities, the Employer had not paid any of the employer contributions that were due to the Scheme. As a result of its maladministration, Miss N was not in the financial position she ought to be in.

• In the Adjudicator’s view, Miss N had suffered serious distress and inconvenience due to the Employer’s maladministration. The Adjudicator was of the opinion that an award of £1,000 for non-financial injustice was appropriate in the circumstances.

Ombudsman’s decision

2 CAS-112570-K9X9

Directions

(i) pay Miss N £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience she has experienced;

(ii) 895.38 Miss N’s Miss N

(iii) establish with the Scheme administrator whether the late payment of the employer contributions has meant that fewer units were purchased in Miss N’s Scheme account than she would have otherwise secured had the contributions been paid on time; and

(iv) pay any reasonable administration fee should the Scheme administrator charge a fee for carrying out the above calculation.

Within 14 days of receiving confirmation from the Scheme administrator of any shortfall in Miss N ’s units, pay the cost of purchasing any additional units required to make up the shortfall.

Anthony Arter CBE

Deputy Pensions Ombudsman

11 September 2024

3 CAS-112570-K9X9

Appendix Date Employee contributions Employer contributions

January 2022 62.58 46.94

February 2022 70.83 53.13

March 2022 60.73 45.55

April 2022 69.20 51.90

May 2022 68.02 51.02

June 2022 59.22 44.42

July 2022 59.66 44.75

August 2022 61.77 46.33

October 2022 68.24 51.18

December 2022 £64.82 48.61

January 2023 74.58 55.94

February 2023 77.17 57.88

March 2023 66.98 50.23

April 2023 69.23 51.93

May 2023 70.86 53.15

June 2023 43.54 32.66

July 2023 75.77 56.83

August 2023 70.57 52.93

4