Pension Disputes: DB Transfers, SIPPs, Annuities and Workplace

Pensions firms' first responses cluster around three patterns. First, "the transfer was in your interests on the information available". The rebuttal is the documentary record. Subject Access Request to the firm for the fact-find, the suitability report, the transfer value analysis (TVAS) report, the contemporaneous notes, the file of pension information from the ceding scheme. Then test against COBS 19 and the prescribed methodology under PS22/13.

Second, "you signed the disclosure documents and acknowledged the risks". The rebuttal is that signatures on standard documents do not transfer the COBS 19 obligation back to the consumer. The adviser remained obliged to make a suitable recommendation; the consumer's signature is not a defence against unsuitability. The FOS published decisions database is full of upheld DB transfer complaints where the consumer signed standard documents.

Third, "the loss is market loss, not advice loss". The rebuttal is the FCA prescribed redress methodology under PS22/13, which calculates compensation as the difference between what the consumer would have had in the original DB scheme versus what the consumer actually has. The methodology is not "investment performance vs market"; it is "DB benefit value vs DC actual value, both at the same date".

For FCA-regulated pension advice (DB transfer, SIPP suitability, annuity sale): complaint to the firm under DISP, eight-week internal handling window under DISP 1.6.2R, FOS referral with a six-month time limit from the firm's final response. For complaints referred from 1st April 2026 about acts on or after 1st April 2019, the FOS maximum binding award is £455,000; for earlier acts, £205,000.

For scheme administration complaints: scheme trustees or administrator first (typically via the scheme's Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure), then The Pensions Ombudsman. TPO has no financial cap and can direct scheme rectification, payment of accrued benefits, and additional sums for distress and inconvenience. The TPO time limit is three years from the act complained of or from when the consumer reasonably should have known.

For employer failures on automatic enrolment: the Pensions Regulator enforces against the employer. Consumer redress for missed contributions runs through the employer and (where the scheme administrator has been at fault) through TPO.

For failed firms: the Financial Services Compensation Scheme covers FCA-regulated pension advice claims up to £85,000 per person per failed firm under s.213 of FSMA 2000. FSCS also covers SIPP claims where the SIPP operator has failed.

The FOS, TPO, and FSCS are all free to consumers. FOS investigation timeframes for pension cases are typically six to eighteen months from referral; complex DB transfer cases under the PS22/13 redress methodology can run longer. TPO turnaround is typically four to twelve months from referral.

Court is the residual route for cases above the FOS cap. Negligence claims run for six years from breach under s.5 of the Limitation Act 1980, with the s.14A latent-damage extension of three years from date of knowledge (fifteen-year longstop). The longstop is particularly important in DB transfer cases where the harm may take years to materialise.

Frank's pension-dispute flow drafts the formal complaint to the firm with the correct COBS 19 framing, runs the eight-week DISP clock, and prepares the FOS submission with the regulatory grounds front-loaded. The Subject Access Request flow generates the SAR for the firm's full file, including the fact-find, the suitability report, the TVAS report, and the contemporaneous notes.

For scheme administration complaints, the flow drafts the complaint to the trustees or administrator and prepares the TPO submission. The platform's redress estimator runs the high-level FCA prescribed methodology calculation for DB transfer cases, so the consumer can sense-check any compensation offer against the methodology.