Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against Prudential Pensions Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5982574 of 2025-12-30T00:00:00+00:00. Account administration errors complaint against Prudential Pensions Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5982574 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2025-12-30T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Prudential Pensions Limited |
| Product | Pension |
| Claim type | Account administration errors |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | Prudential must pay Mr H £400 compensation for distress and inconvenience if not already paid |
Summary
Mr H complained that Prudential stopped his FSAVC pension contributions in May 2024 despite his explicit instruction to continue them, and then made repeated administrative errors when attempting to restart and increase the contributions over the following year. After Mr H reported the stopped contributions in August 2024, Prudential required him to complete forms and contact the firm multiple times to resolve the issue, with conflicting direct debit instructions and continued errors extending into May 2025. Prudential offered £400 compensation, which Mr H rejected as insufficient given the prolonged service failure and his resulting stress, particularly during a period of poor health. The ombudsman upheld Prudential's £400 offer as fair and reasonable, finding it fell within the appropriate FOS compensation range of £300-£750 for considerable distress and inconvenience spread over many months, and rejected Mr H's claim for compensation for investment losses.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Prudential's offer of £400 compensation fell within the appropriate range of £300-£750 for cases involving considerable distress and inconvenience spread over many months requiring significant effort to resolve. While the service failures were serious and prolonged (approximately one year), they did not fall into the upper end of the compensation range (above £750) which is reserved for situations involving substantial distress, humiliation, or disruption of daily life. The ombudsman gave credit to Prudential for recognising its error and making an offer early, before the complaint was referred to the ombudsman service. The ombudsman rejected Mr H's claim for compensation for investment losses, as this resulted from his conscious decision to invest in an ISA rather than return contributions to Prudential. The earlier 2022 callback failure added minimal weight given the much greater number of errors between 2024-2025.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Prudential Pensions Limited, all decisions | 8 | 38% |
| Account administration errors, all decisions | 25,844 | 25% |
| Pension, all decisions | 15,579 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website