The Pensions Regulator’s communications approach has been described as akin to a letter from a water board, where final demands can be sent but do not have “any value”.

Independent Trustee Services director Peter Askins, made the comments at a conference in London on Tuesday. He showed the audience a redacted warning letter from the regulator for a scheme that had missed a deadline.

He said it was titled “Notification of failure – trustees’ failure to comply with part three of the Pensions Act”. Askins said the letter threatens that if the trustees do not take action within a certain period they may be subject to action, which includes fines of £5,000 for individuals.

“I think this is evidence of this change in attitude of the regulator. When I was at DWP when the regulator was set up, it was intended to be a risk-based regulator. This is a water board type approach. This is the final demand from the water board, but like the water board, I don’t think it has any value,” he said. This is because a water board cannot cut off a person’s water supply even if they do not pay their bill. He added that the real issue is the impact it has on trustees.

In what was described by the panel chair, Barnett Waddingham senior consultant Malcolm McLean as “regulator bashing”, Pinsent Masons head of strategic development of pensions Robin Ellison also noted a change of mood coming from within the regulator, stating that they are more responsive to political pressures rather than the interests of members.

Ellison said some of the “overzealous” behaviour from the regulator has been “profoundly unwelcome” and he thinks there is going to be repercussions from that.

However, another panel member, PAN trustees director Roger Mattingly, said his own experiences with the regulator have been “very civil”. Nonetheless, he argued that there is not a “homogeneous culture” within the regulator. He also said that if he could change something about the regulator, he would “come away from this philosophy of sending six to eight people to a meeting”.

The Pensions Regulator declined to comment on the remarks.

Share Story: