Teachers Pension Scheme · CAS-13063-Y1G8

CAS-13063-Y1G8

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mr E

Scheme Teachers Pension Scheme (the Scheme)

Respondent Surrey County Council (the Council)

Complaint Summary Mr E’s complaint concerns the discrepancy between the full time equivalent salary (FTE) stated on his payslips and the FTE salary figures the Council submits to Teachers Pensions (TP), on his behalf. The FTE figures submitted to TP affects the death in service benefit Mr E’s beneficiaries are potentially entitled to.

Summary of the Ombudsman’s Determination and reasons

1 Surrey County Council CAS-13063-Y1G8 Detailed Determination Material facts

Mr E has been employed by the Council since 1980 as a part-time tutor on an annualised contract, and is an active member of the Scheme. The Scheme is administered by TP. The Council provides information to TP such as Mr E’s pensionable service and his salary. TP uses the information it receives from the Council to calculate the benefits Mr E and his beneficiaries are entitled to from the Scheme.

Mr E said that his employment contract states that he is on an “ALA (SCC)” pay scale. He was informed by the Council that the ALA pay scale is £20.24 per hour plus £3.24 holiday pay. This was as of 8 November 2017.

Mr E said that he was never sent retirement benefit statements. However, in 2016, following access to his record online, he became aware that his FTE submitted to TP by the Council was considerably lower than his FTE submitted by other employers, although his salary was identical. The FTE submitted to TP by the Council was also lower than the FTE stated on his payslips.

Subsequently, there were a number of exchanges between Mr E and the Council concerning the FTE submitted to TP.

On 2 August 2017:-

Following this, there were further exchanges between Mr E and the Council concerning how his FTE was calculated, and the difference between the FTE stated on his payslips and those submitted to TP (the Discrepancy).

On 26 July 2018, Mr E complained to the Council. In summary he said:-

2 CAS-13063-Y1G8

Between August 2018 and 4 January 2020, there were further exchanges between Mr E and the Council concerning the Discrepancy. During this period, Mr E had a face-to-face meeting with the Council, and he also raised further complaints to the Council about this issue.

On 7 June 2020, the Council responded to Mr E’s complaint and said in summary:-

3 CAS-13063-Y1G8 Summary of Mr E’s position

4 CAS-13063-Y1G8 The information the Council sent to TP contained many errors, including the FTE figure not rising when there had been salary increases, and the FTE also decreasing in instances where there had been no lowering of salary.

TP said the Council had to correct any incorrect figures in the record. So, he requested for the Council to review his pension record.

The FTE figures on his payslips are less than those sent to TP. The FTE figure is important to the calculation of pension benefits from the Scheme. The in-service death grant is a multiple of the FTE and the FTE figure is also used to calculate the retirement benefits he will be entitled to.

He would also like compensation for the distress and inconvenience this situation has caused him.

Summary of the Council’s position

Conclusions

5 CAS-13063-Y1G8

Directions

6 CAS-13063-Y1G8

Dominic Harris

Pensions Ombudsman

18 July 2024

7