Pensions Ombudsman determination

Nest · CAS-102187-R3G1

Complaint upheldRedress £5002023
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-102187-R3G1

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mr I

Scheme NEST (the Scheme)

Respondent Hoopla Animation Limited (the Employer)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties CAS-102187-R3G1

Caseworker’s Opinion

• The Caseworker 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. He said that the Employer responded to TPO’s communications and agreed that contributions were owed to Mr I. The Employer said it did not have the funds to bring the unpaid pension contributions up to date. However, once it secured its next round of funding it would pay the unpaid pension contributions. The Employer was unable to confirm when this would be.

• The Caseworker said that both parties have agreed that contributions had been deducted from Mr I’s salary but had not been paid into the Scheme. In addition, the Employer had not paid any of the employer contributions that were due over the same period. As a result of its maladministration, Mr I is not in the financial position he ought to be in.

• In the Caseworker’s view, Mr I had suffered significant distress and inconvenience due to the Employer’s maladministration. The Caseworker was of the opinion that an award of £500 for non-financial injustice was appropriate in the circumstances.

The complaint was passed to me to consider. I agree with the Caseworker’s Opinion.

2 CAS-102187-R3G1 Ombudsman’s decision

Directions

(i) pay Mr I £500 for the significant distress and inconvenience he has experienced;

(ii) produce a schedule (the Schedule) showing the employee contributions deducted from Mr I’s pay in respect of the period of his employment. The Schedule shall also include the corresponding employer contributions that were due to the Scheme; and

(iii) forward the Schedule to Mr I.

(i) pay the missing contributions to the Scheme;

(ii) establish with the Scheme whether the late payment of contributions has meant that fewer units were purchased in Mr I’s Scheme account than he would have otherwise secured, had the contributions been paid on time; and

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

3 CAS-102187-R3G1 Within 14 days of receiving confirmation from the Scheme administrator of any shortfall in Mr I’s units, pay the cost of purchasing any additional units required to make up the shortfall.

Anthony Arter CBE

Deputy Pensions Ombudsman 13 November 2023

4 CAS-102187-R3G1 Appendix Date Employee contributions Employer contributions

30 April 2022 £90.13 Unknown

31 March 2022 £119.20 Unknown

28 February 2022 £146.76 Unknown

31 January 2022 £119.20 Unknown

30 November 2021 £119.20 Unknown

Total unpaid employee £594.49 contributions

Total unpaid employer Unknown contributions

5

Nest · CAS-102187-R3G1 — Pensions Ombudsman determination · My AI Tax