The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO) has partially upheld a complaint against Aviva and directed it to pay £500 to the complainant to “put matters right”.

The complainant, Mr N, alleged that a transfer payment of £6,585 to his bank account was rejected and Aviva delayed in identifying and communicating about this with him and his independent financial adviser (IFA) and, as a result, he suffered financial loss because of a lack of investment opportunity.

According to Mr N, Aviva advised him and the IFA in August 2020 that a payment of £6,585.13 had been transferred to IAG in Canada, a payment which was returned later in the same month.

The IFA discovered, through a third party, that the payment had not in fact been completed in August and contacted Aviva to ask why it had not informed him of this, a request which was repeated in September.

In October 2020, the IFA made a formal complaint to Aviva on behalf of Mr N.

In response to Mr N’s complaint, Aviva stated that it had followed the instructions provided by IAG for referencing the payment when it made the transfer and that the receiving provider’s account received the money but did not recognise the transfer.

Aviva additionally explained that the receiving provider confirmed the payment had been received and that, because Aviva followed the instructions given by the receiving provider, IAG should be liable for any financial loss incurred.

Aviva apologised for having not identified sooner that the payment had failed and, for this failure, offered Mr N £250.

However, Mr N maintained that the main issue was that Aviva failed to communicate with him regarding the payments and that it caused unreasonable delays.

Mr N’s complaint was first considered by one of TPO’s adjudicator who concluded that further action was required by Aviva as it initially provided incorrect information to Mr N and communicated poorly with him and the IFA concerning the payment and this amounted to maladministration.

However, the adjudicator also stated that there is no evidence that Mr N would have invested the money in a particular investment fund so there was no evidence that he suffered financial loss as a result of the delay and, furthermore, the error appeared to have been due to another party, rather than Aviva.

After Mr N did not accept the adjudicator’s opinion, the complaint was passed to the ombudsman to consider.

Despite Mr N providing additional comments to the case, the ombudsman agreed with the adjudicator’s ruling and partially upheld Mr N’s complaint.

TPO directed that, within 28 days of the date of the determination, Aviva should pay Mr N £500 due to the “non-financial injustice” that he suffered.

Share Story: