Aviva Personal Retirement Policy · CAS-37264-N1C4

CAS-37264-N1C4

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mrs R

Scheme Aviva Personal Retirement Policy

Respondent Aviva Life & Pensions UK Limited (Aviva)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties The sequence of events is not in dispute, so I have only set out the salient points. I acknowledge there were other exchanges of information between all the parties.

Mrs R held three policies (the Policies) with Aviva; one of which had a GAR. Mrs R lived in New Zealand and employed the services of an independent financial adviser (IFA) based in New Zealand.

On 25 January 2018, following an information request, Aviva sent the IFA information regarding the Policies. In this Aviva confirmed that Mrs R did not have a GAR applicable to any of her benefits.

On 1 February 2018, Aviva sent the IFA a retirement illustration which confirmed that a GAR was applicable to one of the Policies.

On 3 March 2019, Mrs R wrote to Aviva requesting the necessary retirement forms to take her benefits from the Policies as a lump sum. Mrs R intended to use the lump sum to purchase a commercial property as part of her retirement plan.

1 CAS-37264-N1C4 On 20 March 2019, Aviva sent Mrs R a retirement illustration for each of the Policies (the March Retirement Illustrations). It said that, once Mrs R had read all the information and considered any guidance or financial advice, she should telephone Aviva with her decision. The notes on the March Retirement Illustrations said that:-

“It is important to remember that some or all of your pension fund may have a GAR option.”

On 28 March 2019, Mrs R sent Aviva a signed authority form (the Form) to surrender her funds as a one-off payment. On the Form, Mrs R wrote that she did not have a personal bank account; so, she provided details of her business account. Aviva received the Form on 9 April 2019.

Aviva advised that it could not accept business account details and, on 15 April 2019, after opening a personal bank account, Mrs R provided these details to Aviva.

On 10 June 2019, Aviva sent Mrs R a letter requesting confirmation that she was happy to proceed with her chosen retirement option despite having a GAR applicable to some of her benefits. Mrs R received this letter on 27 June 2019.

On 14 June 2019, Mrs R raised a complaint with Aviva due to the length of time taken to process her retirement benefits.

On 4 July 2019, Aviva received confirmation from Mrs R that she was happy to proceed with her chosen retirement option. She said that she was aware that she had a GAR applicable to some of her benefits but was happy to take the lump sum and lose the GAR.

On 9 July 2019, Aviva transferred Mrs R’s retirement lump sum payment. Aviva added an increment payment to compensate Mrs R for the delay between 10 April 2019 and 9 July 2019. This amount was calculated using the Bank of England base rate plus 1% and totalled £306.95. The final amount paid to Mrs R, after tax, was £49,357.61.

On 16 July 2019, Aviva responded to Mrs R’s complaint. It said that:-

• Although it had received all its requirements by 15 April 2019 it failed to proceed within its expected timescale.

• Before payment could be made, and to comply with Financial Conduct Authority regulations, it issued Mrs R a warning a letter regarding the GAR applicable to some of her benefits.

• Due to the delay and in recognition of the inconvenience caused, it had paid £100 to Mrs R’s bank account.

Mrs R’s position

2 CAS-37264-N1C4

Aviva’s position

“Wherever possible, the date of unit surrender will be the working day following receipt of the policy holder’s instruction/completed forms.”

Adjudicator’s Opinion

3 CAS-37264-N1C4

Mrs R did not accept the Adjudicator’s Opinion and the complaint was passed to me to consider. Mrs R provided her further comments which do not change the outcome. I agree with the Adjudicator’s Opinion and note the additional points raised by Mrs R. Mrs R said that:-

• Aviva had not been able to provide any evidence that it sent her a retirement illustration showing the benefit of her GAR.

• She is not disputing that she sent the email waiving her GAR benefit, however, she had done so thinking she did not have this benefit.

Ombudsman’s decision

4 CAS-37264-N1C4

I uphold Mrs R’s complaint in part.

Directions

Anthony Arter

Pensions Ombudsman 17 February 2022

5