Pensions Ombudsman determination

Nest · CAS-116871-T5K2

Complaint upheldRedress £1,7632024
Get your free legal insight →Email to a colleague
Get your free legal insight on this case →

Verbatim text of this Pensions Ombudsman determination. Sourced directly from the Pensions Ombudsman published register. The Pensions Ombudsman is a statutory tribunal — its determinations are public record. Not an AI summary, not a paraphrase.

Full determination

CAS-116871-T5K2

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mrs S

Scheme NEST (the Scheme)

Respondent SVL Healthcare Service Ltd (the Employer)

Outcome Mrs S’ complaint is upheld and, to put matters right, the Employer shall pay £176.31 into the Scheme. The Employer shall ensure that Mrs S is not financially disadvantaged by its maladministration. So, it shall arrange for any investment loss to be calculated and paid into the Scheme.

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties

In November 2017, Mrs S began her employment with the Employer.

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

On 24 January 2024, Mrs S brought her complaint to The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO).

Mrs S provided copies of the payslips that she held for the period from September 2023 to November 2023, which detailed the pension contributions deducted from her pay. These deductions amounted to £100.77. A breakdown of the deductions from these payslips has been included in the Appendix. The payslips did not show the employer contributions which have also not been paid into the Scheme. 1 SVL Healthcare Services Ltd CAS-116871-T5K2 On 10 June 2024, TPO wrote to the Employer to ask for more information in response to Mr T’s complaint. The Employer acknowledged the receipt of the email on the same day and said it would respond within three working days. However, no response was received.

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 Mrs S.

• Based on the information provided by Mrs S, £100.77 in employee contributions had not been remitted to the Scheme. Mrs S’ payslips did not show the employer contributions in respect of Mrs S’ pay for September to November 2023, even though she was still enrolled in the Scheme and her pay met the pension qualifying earnings threshold.

• Mrs S’ gross salary for September 2023 was £861.61 and £828.53 for both October and November 2023. Contributions should have been paid into the Scheme in line with the minimum automatic enrolment contribution rate of 3% and 5% employer and employee contributions respectively. It was the Adjudicator’s view, on the balance of probabilities that £75.54 in employer contributions had not been remitted into the Scheme for these months.

• The Adjudicator said that she had no reason to doubt the information provided by Mrs S. So, in the Adjudicator’s Opinion, on the balance of probabilities, contributions had been deducted from Mrs S’ salary but had not been paid into the Scheme. In addition, the Employer had not paid any of the employer contributions

2 CAS-116871-T5K2 that were due over the same period. As a result of its maladministration, Mrs S was not in the financial position she ought to be in.

• In the Adjudicator’s view, Mrs S 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

Directions

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

(ii) 176.31 Mrs S’ Mrs S

; 3 CAS-116871-T5K2 (iii) establish with the Scheme whether the late payment of contributions has meant that fewer units were purchased in Mrs 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.

Anthony Arter CBE

Deputy Pensions Ombudsman

6 August 2024

4 CAS-116871-T5K2 Appendix Payslip month Gross Salary (£) Employee Employer contributions (£) contributions (£)

September 2023 861.61 34.47 *

October 2023 828.53 33.15 *

November 2023 828.53 33.15 *

* The employer contributions for each month are not included in the payslips

5