Stanplan F Final Earnings Plan Also Referred Group Final Salary Plan · CAS-31661-B1C8

CAS-31661-B1C8

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mr I

Scheme Stanplan F Final Earnings Plan also referred to as Group Final Salary Plan (the Plan)

Respondent Standard Life Assurance Limited (Standard Life)

Outcome

Complaint summary Mr I disagrees with Standard Life’s assertion that as he was a member of the Plan for less than five years he does not qualify for a pension from his former employer, Graham Poulter Group (GPG).

Background information, including submissions from the parties

1 CAS-31661-B1C8

Date the Plan Commenced 01/04/1974

Date the Plan Closed 31/03/1980

Date Mr I Joined the Plan 01/07/1977

Date Mr I Left the Plan 01/04/1979

On 14 March 2018, Mr I contacted Standard Life and asked for copies of letters it received from GPG informing Standard Life that:-

• The Plan should be set up and closed. 2 CAS-31661-B1C8 • Mr I had joined and left the Plan.

On 16 August 2018, Standard Life told Mr I that it had checked its archives but could not find any further information about the Plan, as it was not legally obliged to keep records for more than seven years.

On 20 February 2019, Mr I asked Standard Life how he could escalate his concerns about his lost pension entitlement. Mr I also complained that Standard Life’s letters were not signed by an individual.

On 1 March 2019, Standard Life acknowledged Mr I’s complaint and confirmed that it would investigate his concerns.

On 2 April 2019, Standard Life issued its final response to Mr I’s complaint and said that:-

• It had searched its records thoroughly and did not hold any documents relating to the Plan.

• Its electronic records confirmed that GPG received a refund of contributions when the Plan was closed in accordance with the SSA 73.

• The letters were not signed by a member of staff because the templates did not allow for this. Mr I’s concerns about this had been highlighted to the appropriate manager.

In response, Mr I asked Standard Life how it could confirm that any contributions were refunded to GPG if it held no records for the Plan.

On 10 April 2019, Standard Life, again, confirmed the dates that Mr I was a member of the Plan. It said that it held no records or documentation from the time that contributions would have been returned to GPG.

As part of our investigation into Mr I’s complaint, Standard Life provided evidence of Mr I’s membership start date and two lists of GPG employees who were members of the Plan in 1980.

3 CAS-31661-B1C8 Adjudicator’s Opinion

Mr I did not accept the Adjudicator’s Opinion and the complaint was passed to me to consider. Mr I has provided his further comments which do not change the outcome. Mr I has said:-

• The revised contract made it clear that he would be eligible for the company pension scheme after one year of service, so he automatically joined the Plan on 28 June 1975.

• Standard Life had not provided any evidence to support the dates that it had supplied or to show that it had refunded the contributions to GPG.

• The Adjudicator could not assume that the contributions were refunded to GPG without collaborating evidence.

• He should be entitled to a pension of £205 a month and, whilst it is not a high amount, it would be useful.

I agree with the Adjudicator’s Opinion and note the additional points made by Mr I.

4 CAS-31661-B1C8 Ombudsman’s decision Mr I has said that he was a member of the company pension scheme from 28 June 1975 until 15 May 1981, so he is entitled to a pension from the Plan. Standard Life has said that Mr I was a member of the Plan between 1 July 1977 and 1 April 1979.

There is no legal requirement for Standard Life to keep detailed records from over 40 years ago. In the absence of the full facts and supporting evidence, my decision must be based on the balance of probabilities and what is most likely to have happened at the time. The burden of proof in this case lies with Mr I and it is for him to prove that he was in fact a member of the Plan throughout his eligible service with GPG.

In May 2016, Mr I contacted Standard Life to find out what benefits he was entitled to from the Plan. Standard Life confirmed that Mr I was a member of the Plan for less than five years so he was not entitled to any pension.

The revised contract that Mr I has provided states that employees would be eligible for the company pension scheme once they had completed 12 months service. It does not say that employees would be automatically enrolled, as Mr I says he was. Given the time that has passed since Mr I left GPG, Standard Life has limited documentation available. However, it has provided a record that shows Mr I joined the Plan, not GPG, on 1 July 1977. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I consider it is more likely than not that Mr I joined the Plan on 1 July 1977.

Mr I maintains that his Plan membership ceased when he left GPG on 15 May 1981. However, Standard Life has provided evidence which shows that the Plan closed on 31 March 1980 and Mr I had left the Plan, not GPG, on 1 April 1979. Mr I does not believe that the evidence that Standard Life has provided is sufficient to support the dates that it says he was a member of the Plan. However, he has not provided any evidence to support his claim. I have no reason to doubt that the Plan closed on 31 March 1980 so Mr I could not have been a member when he left GPG.

Mr I has not persuaded me that he held the Plan for at least five years so I do not agree that he is entitled to a preserved pension. In addition, as the Plan was non- contributory, Mr I did not personally pay into the company pension scheme so there are no contributions to refund to him. Standard Life does not have evidence of the contribution refund transaction and I do not find this unreasonable, considering the time that has passed since then. I think that it is more likely than not that GPG would have received a refund of the contributions that it made in accordance with the SSA 73.

Mr I has said that he was relying on a pension of around £205 a month, based on his calculations of what his entitlement might be. Had Mr I been entitled to a preserved pension, Standard Life would have sent him annual statements and information about his options in the lead up to his retirement as is standard practice for scheme administrators. Mr I did not receive any correspondence after he left the Plan so it was not reasonable for him to believe that he was entitled to a pension that he had received no information about. 5 CAS-31661-B1C8 I do not uphold Mr I’s complaint.

Anthony Arter

Pensions Ombudsman 19 October 2020

6