Nest · CAS-98085-L6R7

CAS-98085-L6R7

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mr H

Scheme NEST (the Scheme)

Respondent ME Estate Agents (Alton) Limited (the Employer)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties In 1 May 2019, Mr H began his employment with the Employer.

On 11 October 2022, Mr H resigned from his employment with the Employer. Amongst other things, he said that he would not take any further action against the Employer as long as it settled all outstanding pension contributions by the end of November 2022.

The next day, the Employer wrote to Mr H and said that it accepted his resignation. It said that all outstanding pension contributions would be paid by the end of November 2022.

Despite its assurances, the Employer did not pay all outstanding pension contributions by the November deadline.

On 7 December 2022, Mr H brought his complaint to The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO).

1 CAS-77197-F9W8 Mr H provided copies of the payslips that he held for the period, which detailed the pension contributions deducted from his pay and the corresponding employer contributions. Mr H stated that the overall unpaid contributions amounted to £3,000. A breakdown of the deductions has been included in the Appendix. Please note, the Appendix only includes the deductions from the payslips Mr H has sent to TPO. So, it may not show the full extent of the unpaid contributions.

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, as the Employer had not responded to any of TPO’s communications, he had to base his Opinion solely on the information provided by Mr H.

• The Caseworker said that he had no reason to doubt the information provided by Mr H. So, in the Caseworker’s Opinion, on the balance of probabilities, contributions had been deducted from Mr H’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 H was not in the financial position he ought to be in.

• In the Caseworker’s view, Mr H had suffered serious distress and inconvenience due to the Employer’s maladministration. The Caseworker was of the opinion that an award of £1,000 for non-financial injustice was appropriate in the circumstances.

Ombudsman’s decision

2 CAS-77197-F9W8

Directions

(i) pay Mr H £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience he has experienced;

(ii) produce a schedule (the Schedule) showing the employee contributions deducted from Mr H’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 H.

(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 H’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.

Within 14 days of receiving confirmation from the Scheme administrator of any shortfall in Mr H’s units, pay the cost of purchasing any additional units required to make up the shortfall.

Anthony Arter CBE

Deputy Pensions Ombudsman 1 December 2023

3 CAS-77197-F9W8

Appendix

Date Employee contributions Employer contributions

31/05/2021 £146.76 £110.07

30/07/2021 £103.63 Not stated

29/10/2021 £96.41 Not stated

30/11/2021 £104.72 Not stated

31/12/2021 £82.20 Not stated

30/01/2022 £79.20 Not stated

31/03/2022 £95.97 Not stated

30/04/2022 £79.20 Not stated

31/05/2022 £79.20 Not stated

30/07/2022 £79.20 Not stated

31/08/2022 £79.20 Not stated

4