The Pensions Ombudsman has told a firm it must pay out after a client complained about the “incorrect and inconsistent valuation of his pension fund”.

Anthony Arter, the ombudsman, said there was “no dispute” that NOW: Pensions and JLT collectively “failed to keep and maintain proper records of member and employer contributions”.

Mr S’ complaint against NOW: Pensions was partly upheld and the company was told to pay him £500 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to him and £34.40 for the administration fees and investment loss.

Mr S said he was unhappy with the “incorrect and inconsistent valuation” of his pension fund. It did not reflect his contributions and those of his employer, the combined total of which were in excess of £800, the report stated, and there was a failure to properly account for those contributions.

Mr S was initially employed on a temporary 18 month contract and became a member of the Now: Pensions scheme. His position was made permanent at the end of the temporary contract on 26 February 2016. When his position was made permanent Mr S informed his employer he wanted to transfer his funds to a Self Invested Personal Pension with an alternative provider.

In March 2016, NOW: Pensions sent Mr S a pension benefits statement that calculated the combined employer and employee contributions but there was a discrepancy in the figures.

NOW: Pensions wrote to Mr S to say: “We are aware that there are issues with up to date information presenting on our systems, however, I can assure you this is no fault of your employer, this is due to the data being transmitted between the payrolls systems and the pension system. We have, with the help of your employer identified this issue and are working to resolve this as soon as possible”.

Mr S raised a formal complaint with NOW: Pensions by email on in April about his disappointment and frustration over the incorrect valuation of his pension fund.

Soon after, NOW: Pensions wrote to Mr S and informed him that since his employer had not updated the leaving date on his records, the transfer could not proceed. Now: Pensions also confirmed that the figure stated on the transfer quotation was not guaranteed and did not take into account the missing contributions.

Mr S contacted NOW: Pensions on several occasions but did not receive any acknowledgements or responses, so he raised further complaints.

The transfer was eventually finalised on 13 June.

NOW: Pensions apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused by the issues, and offered Mr S £100 to Mr S on 28 July, telling him that:

•  the quality of service provided had fallen short of the level of service it would normally provide
•  it was working with all parties to correct member contribution records
•  recent initiatives had been put in place which have resulted in a significant improvement
•  it acknowledged that the transfer value had reduced from £806.92 to around £770.52.

NOW: Pensions later alleged that it was Mr S’ employer’s fault for “delinquent record-keeping” but the ombudsman said he did not find that the employer contributed to the delays that occurred.

The administration of pension schemes is the ‘everyday job’ of NOW: Pensions and JLT; and the transmission of data from his employer to NOW: Pensions and JLT’s system is largely its responsibility.

The ombudsman said: “I find that equal fault lies with NOW: Pensions and JLT, as providers of professional pension administration services; they ought to have held accurate records.”
NOW: Pensions subcontracts its pensions administration services to JLT. It requested that the ombudsman holds it responsible in respect of any failings by JLT.
The Adjudicator recommended that NOW: Pensions ought to establish what Mr S’ fund would have been worth had the contributions been invested earlier. But Mr Arter said he was “unable to support this direction because there is insufficient information available to me to ascertain with certainty date when the transfer should have taken place”.

The ombudsman turned down Mr S’ call for a further £100 to compensate him for the loss he considers he has suffered, as a result of the delay in investing in Fresnillo shares.

He also did not agree with Mr S’ request that he suffered a financial loss post 5 May as a result of the actions of NOW: Pensions.