Barclays Bank Uk Retirement Fund · CAS-37620-T3T0

CAS-37620-T3T0

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mrs E

Scheme Barclays Bank UK Retirement Fund (the Fund)

Respondents Barclays Pension Funds Trustees Limited (the Trustee) Willis Towers Watson (WTW)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties

“We must be in receipt of all completed forms by 24 November 2018 to secure the guaranteed transfer value. If we receive the ‘transfer agreement’ or ‘Confirmation of Appropriate Independent Advice’ form after 24 November 2018, the transfer value will be recalculated and it may be higher or lower than the value shown on the enclosed statement. If your revised guaranteed 1 CAS-37620-T3T0 transfer value is higher, or within 10% of the amount shown on the statement of entitlement, we will go ahead and pay the revised transfer value.”

2 CAS-37620-T3T0

Summary of Mrs E’s position

3 CAS-37620-T3T0

Summary of WTW’s position

Summary of the Trustee’s position

4 CAS-37620-T3T0

Adjudicator’s Opinion

• The Adjudicator noted that the Act covers the requirements when taking a CETV. See the Appendix for an extract from the relevant section of the Act.

• The Adjudicator took the view that the Trustee would not have known if Mrs E’s application satisfied the ‘ways’ referred to in subsection 95(1) of the Act unless it had the receiving scheme’s details and was able to check that it met either subsection (a), (b), (c) or (d) of 95(2). The Adjudicator was of the opinion that Mrs E’s application could not have been treated as complete unless all of this information was provided within the guarantee period as set out in 95(1A).

• The Adjudicator said that, if it was sufficient for Mrs E to return only her part of the paperwork, she would have been able to take as long as she wanted to find a receiving scheme and supply the details to the Trustee, with the CETV continuing to be guaranteed. In the Adjudicator’s opinion, this would not have been correct.

• The IFA argued that TPR states that an extra 10 days is available for the provision of the confirmation that independent advice had been received. He also argued that it would not be unreasonable for the receiving scheme section of the transfer agreement to be provided within that same timescale.

• The Adjudicator noted that, in the Guidance, TPR stated: “Members must also be informed that the authorised independent adviser’s confirmation that appropriate independent advice has been obtained by the member must be in the required form and be provided to the trustees within three months of the day on which the statement of entitlement was provided to the member”.

• Furthermore, the Adjudicator noted that the Guidance also stated that: “Trustees have discretion to honour a transfer in the event member confirmation is received after the three-month period, for example, if there has been a delay in obtaining appropriate independent advice.”

• The Adjudicator was of the opinion that TPR was not suggesting the 10-day extension should be allowed in every case. In the Adjudicator’s view, it was for the Trustee to decide if it should exercise its discretion to allow further time. However, it did not have to do so and, this discretion did not extend to any other information. The Adjudicator noted that the Trustee had not chosen to exercise this discretion.

5 CAS-37620-T3T0 • In the Adjudicator’s view, in its letter of 24 August 2018, WTW was clear in relation to its requirements for the CETV that it had quoted to be paid. It stated that it must receive all completed forms by 24 November 2018 to secure the guaranteed transfer value. It went on to say that, if it received the transfer agreement or the confirmation of appropriate independent advice form after 24 November 2018, then the transfer value would be recalculated.

• The Adjudicator noted the comment made by the IFA that it took nearly a year for the Trustee to decide that the complaint would not be upheld. Before the IDRP complaint was raised, the IFA made an initial complaint on 31 January 2019. WTW responded to this complaint on 25 February 2019. Further comments were made by the IFA on 25 February 2019. WTW responded to these comments on 10 April 2019. In the view of the Adjudicator, none of these response times were excessive.

• On 10 April 2019, the IFA made further comments and it was these comments that triggered the IDRP. The Adjudicator noted that the Trustee did not provide its formal response under stage two of the IDRP until 12 August 2019. In his view, eight weeks would normally be a reasonable timescale for the provision of a response. However, he noted that the Trustee did look to shorten the IDRP by offering to move the IFA’s complaint straight to stage two of the procedure. The Adjudicator noted that the IFA agreed with this approach.

• In the opinion of the Adjudicator, the time taken by the Trustee to provide its stage two IDRP response was longer than would have been expected. However, the Adjudicator took the view that there was not an excessive delay in the end-to-end procedure due to the bypassing of stage one of the IDRP.

No further evidence was provided by Mrs E or the IFA.

I agree with the Adjudicator’s Opinion.

Ombudsman’s decision

6 CAS-37620-T3T0

7 CAS-37620-T3T0

I do not uphold Mrs E’s complaint.

Anthony Arter

Pensions Ombudsman 25 August 2021

8 CAS-37620-T3T0 Appendix Extract from the Pension Schemes Act 1993

Chapter 1 Transfer Rights: General

“95 Ways of taking right to cash equivalent

(1) A member of a pension scheme who has acquired a right to take a cash equivalent in accordance with this Chapter may only take it by making an application in writing to the trustees or managers of the scheme requiring them to use the cash equivalent in one of the ways specified below.

(1A) In the case of a right acquired under section 94(1), the application must be made -

(a) within the period of 3 months beginning with the guarantee date shown in the relevant statement of entitlement, and

(b) if the cash equivalent relates to benefits that are not flexible benefits, by no later than the date that falls one year before the member attains normal pension age.

(2) In the case of a member of an occupational pension scheme that is not an unfunded public service defined benefits scheme, the ways referred to in subsection (1) are -

(a) for acquiring transfer credits allowed under the rules of another occupational pension scheme -

(i) the trustees or managers of which are able and willing to accept payment in respect of the member's transferrable rights, and

(ii) which satisfies prescribed requirements;

(b) for acquiring rights allowed under the rules of a personal pension scheme -

(i) the trustees or managers of which are able and willing to accept payment in respect of the member's transferrable rights, and

(ii) which satisfies prescribed requirements;

(c) for purchasing from one or more insurers such as are mentioned in section 19(4)(a), chosen by the member and willing to accept payment on account of the member from the trustees or managers, one or more annuities which satisfy prescribed requirements;

(d) for subscribing to other pension arrangements which satisfy prescribed requirements.”

9