Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Liverpool Victoria Life Company Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5137757 of 2024-11-11T00:00:00+00:00. Service failures generally complaint against Liverpool Victoria Life Company Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5137757 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2024-11-11T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Liverpool Victoria Life Company Limited |
| Product | Pension |
| Claim type | Service failures generally |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Pay 8% simple interest per annum on Mr D's lump sum for 34 days to account for delays in receiving funds. Pay £300 compensation for distress, inconvenience and loss of expectation. If compensation not paid within 28 days, add 8% simple interest per year from decision date to payment date. Provide tax deduction certificate if requested. |
Summary
Mr D complained about service failures during his pension maturity process with Liverpool Victoria. Over six months, he experienced multiple delays including failed transfer attempts to other providers and incorrect advice that he could transfer to an FTA, which was impossible due to his fund size. Liverpool Victoria's errors included sending funds to Firm V without checking their restrictions (16-day delay) and advising Mr D about FTA eligibility without verifying his fund value (13-day delay causing unnecessary Pension Wise appointment). The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Liverpool Victoria's initial £200 compensation offer insufficient and directing them to pay 8% simple interest on the lump sum for 34 days plus £300 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman identified three distinct periods of avoidable delay caused by Liverpool Victoria: (1) 16 days from sending funds to Firm V (6 November) to their return (22 November) due to Liverpool Victoria's failure to check Firm V's restrictions; (2) 13 days from incorrect FTA advice (29 November) to correct advice (12 December), causing Mr D to unnecessarily attend Pension Wise; (3) 6 working days excess processing time for the lump sum request (11 working days actual vs 5 expected). The ombudsman rejected consideration of complaint handling as it is not a regulated activity. Regarding distress, the ombudsman found Mr D suffered loss of expectation and inconvenience from the incorrect FTA advice and unnecessary Pension Wise appointment, but not significant distress from the 6-day lump sum delay as he was not in desperate need of funds.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Liverpool Victoria Life Company Limited, all decisions | 24 | 33% |
| Service failures generally, all decisions | 34,193 | 32% |
| Pension, all decisions | 15,602 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website