You explain: “The Pension Advisory Service has now checked all the rules and it seems that M圜SP is in the right. You are not happy with this, but accept M圜SP is legally correct.
Unfortunately, M圜SP declines to comment on problems with individual pensioners, beyond its spokeswoman saying: “As administrator for the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme, M圜SP is required to follow the Scheme and HMRC rules regarding all refunds and payments, and we believe that we have done so in this case.” As a result of our enquiry to M圜SP, you have received additional correspondence explaining the situation. (See ‘Questions of Cash’, 28 March, 2015). JB, London.Ī | Other former civil servants are unhappy about correspondence delays with M圜SP about their pension plans. I am frustrated by my attempts at correspondence with M圜SP.
I believe that paying the refund as an “unauthorised payment” discriminates against unmarried employees. I believe that if the payment had been paid to me at the correct time, it would have been part of my tax-free lump sum. I refused to accept it to be paid in this way, as it would have become subject to special 55 per cent tax rules. In July last year, I received a letter from the new operator of the civil service pension scheme, M圜SP, offering the payment as what was called an “unauthorised payment”. At that point, I chased my WPS refund and was told it was being dealt with. I worked part-time until full retirement in March last year. The WPS refund is paid to unmarried employees who pay the full married person’s contributions to the Civil Service Pension Scheme. I was told my WPS refund would be paid on full retirement. I then completely withdrew from the pension scheme.
Q | I took partial retirement from the Civil Service in March 2012 and received a lump sum.
0 kommentar(er)
