Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme · CAS-53528-D7X7

CAS-53528-D7X7

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mrs N

Scheme Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (the Scheme)

Respondents MyCSP Cabinet Office (CO) Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties

1 MyCSP, Cabinet Office, Department for Work and Pensions CAS-53528-D7X7

2 CAS-53528-D7X7

3 CAS-53528-D7X7

On 29 March 2019, Mrs N submitted a complaint under the Scheme’s two-stage Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure (IDRP). She was concerned about the level of pension she was to receive from the Scheme and considered that it was an insufficient amount to live on. She said that as she had taken partial retirement, her annual pension had been reduced by £1,770, to approximately £2,700. She had been informed by MyCSP that her pension would be reduced by 5% for each year of early retirement, but MyCSP had not provided specific figures regarding her entitlement. She added that she was suffering from a mental illness at the time, so was not in a position to make an informed decision about her retirement.

On 12 June 2019, MyCSP issued a response to Mrs N under stage one of the IDRP. MyCSP said that it could not comment on whether Mrs N’s pension from the Scheme was of a fair level, only whether it was in accordance with the Scheme’s Regulations. It considered that Mrs N’s pension entitlement had been correctly calculated. MyCSP explained the basis on which Mrs N's pension had been actuarially reduced, following her partial retirement from the Scheme. It said that the usual NPA, for members of the Classic section of the Scheme, was 60. Mrs N had not attained this age when she partially retired from the Scheme, effective in November 2012.

MyCSP referred to the guidance for partial retirement that was available on the Scheme’s website at the time of Mrs N’s partial retirement. It said this highlighted that any actuarial reduction would be permanent. It also referred to the December 2012 Quotation, which explained the reduction applicable for early retirement. MyCSP considered that Mrs N had been given adequate explanation of the early retirement process and that no suggestion had been made at the time that any actuarial reduction of her benefits would be temporary.

MyCSP explained that when Mrs N took partial retirement, she chose to receive a pension derived from all the benefits she had accrued in the Scheme up to that point. She then continued to accrue further benefits, which were drawn at her final retirement date. MyCSP said that, as Mrs N had at times been employed part-time, her reckonable service was calculated on a pro rata basis for any periods of part-time employment. This was why Mrs N’s reckonable service in the Scheme was less than the 34 years for which she had been a member of the Scheme.

4 CAS-53528-D7X7 On 25 September 2019, Mrs N completed a form to move her complaint to stage two of the IDRP. CO said it received this appeal on 4 November 2019. Mrs N reiterated her concern about the level of pension she was to receive from the Scheme. She enclosed details of her calculation of the financial loss she believed she had suffered; the total loss amounted to £47,595. She said that she took partial retirement from the Scheme due to her poor health. However, she asserted that if she had been fully aware of the pension she would receive, she would not have made this decision. She considered that she was financially worse off due to having retired early.

On 11 December 2019, CO issued a response to Mrs N under stage two of the IDRP. CO agreed with MyCSP’s position that Mrs N was in receipt of the correct pension from the Scheme. CO said that Mrs N’s application form for partial retirement (the CSP15) was no longer on file. However, CO asserted that DWP had received a completed CSP15 from Mrs N, and this would have included a declaration for Mrs N to sign, acknowledging that she had read the Partial Retirement Guide. CO added that the December 2012 Quotation had given Mrs N an estimate of the actuarial reduction that would apply, if she took partial retirement before the NPA. Although these figures were subsequently revised, CO considered that the estimate had highlighted to Mrs N that there would be an actuarial reduction.

Following the referral of the complaint to The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO), the parties have made further submissions which are summarised below.

She was not given enough information to make an informed decision about her partial retirement from the Scheme. She did not receive a copy of the Partial Retirement Guide, nor did she receive an estimate of the pension she would receive.

She does not agree that she completed the CSP15. She did not electronically sign the document and would never use the shortened form of her name that is shown on the copy submitted. She also considers that a manager should have been required to countersign this form.

She was not in a position at the time, with regard to her mental health, to be able to make a sound decision about her retirement.

She now considers that if she were to live past 80, her financial loss may be as much as £65,301.40. The actuarial reductions applied for her early retirement should be either diminished in value, or disapplied entirely.

It has submitted a copy of the CSP15, which records Mrs N’s electronic signature being applied on 4 July 2012. This set out Mrs N’s intention to reduce her weekly hours with DWP from 23 to 13.48, effective from November 2012. The CSP15 included a declaration that Mrs N had read the Partial Retirement Guide and utilised the pension calculator on the Scheme’s website.

5 CAS-53528-D7X7 During the investigation of the complaint at stage two of the IDRP, CO did not have sight of the CSP15 and MyCSP did not hold a copy of this. Mrs N stated that she did not complete this form during the partial retirement process. CO therefore contacted DWP, as Mrs N’s former employer, to obtain a copy of the form it held. This was forwarded to TPO and Mrs N for their respective attention.

Adjudicator’s Opinion

6 CAS-53528-D7X7

Mrs N did not accept the Adjudicator’s Opinion and the complaint was passed to me to consider. Mrs N’s comments in response are summarised as follows:-

• She did not receive the quotations referred to by the Adjudicator. She would not have proceeded on the same basis if the administration for her retirement had been carried out appropriately.

• Her current pension income is not viable, given that the actuarial reduction applied to her benefits will be permanent.

• The Adjudicator made assumptions which favoured DWP’s interpretation of events. She did not electronically sign the CSP15 and would never use the shortened form of her name. She believes the document to be fraudulent.

I have considered Mrs N’s comments but they do not change the outcome, I agree with the Adjudicator’s Opinion.

Ombudsman’s decision

7 CAS-53528-D7X7

I do not uphold Mrs N’s complaint.

Anthony Arter CBE

Deputy Pensions Ombudsman

29 October 2024

8