1 / 24

Murphy Lives On - some observations on complaint handling

Murphy Lives On - some observations on complaint handling. Paul Kenny The Pensions Ombudsman. When a complaint is made…. Does the Complaint handler…. Lend a sympathetic ear? Attack the complainant? Reach for their Lawyer? Call in the PI Brigade? Actually look for the facts?

hollie
Download Presentation

Murphy Lives On - some observations on complaint handling

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Murphy Lives On - some observations on complaint handling Paul KennyThe Pensions Ombudsman

  2. When a complaint is made…. • Does the Complaint handler…. • Lend a sympathetic ear? • Attack the complainant? • Reach for their Lawyer? • Call in the PI Brigade? • Actually look for the facts? • Agree that he has a case? • Apologise? • Refer the complainant to IDR?

  3. No Standard Response to complaints • Responses vary according to the “complainee” • Insurance companies are generally good – positive response, quick to acknowledge failures • Intermediaries vary • Trustees and Employers sometimes hide behind each other

  4. And the Complainant • Some people are their own worst enemies • The nit-picker • When he cries “wolf”, nobody listens any more • The Chip on the Shoulder • Not again! • The Worrier • But it might happen…. …to name but a few

  5. Pitfalls • Don’t be tempted to batten down the hatches and hope he’ll go away – he won’t • Don’t treat complainants as dangerous lunatics • Do acknowledge the complaint and treat it seriously • Do try to deal with it as quickly as possible

  6. Remember • Most people who complain really do feel aggrieved • Many feel they have a strong case • They may not be correct but should be handled with respect • Even habitual complainers • Real “chancers” are rare enough

  7. An apology? • Remember that sometimes an apology is enough (“it’s the principle…”) • Complainants need to feel they are being listened to • Failure of the scheme /administrator /trustee to reply will escalate the problem • People who feel they are not taken seriously feel aggrieved • And complain to me

  8. One Little Word • A missing word – a missing clause • “… because….” • Many complaints could be avoided by giving an adequate – or a clear – explanation of the reasons for trustees’ or employers’ actions

  9. More confusion and more complaints result from poor communication than from almost any other single factor. When a complaint arises, keep the lines of communication open

  10. Compliance with Disclosure Requirements • Most schemes are generally compliant, though there are always some problems • The requirements are straightforward (if potentially expensive) • Meeting them can be a problem! • Because of the weight of regulation, temptation is to tick boxes without regard for clarity of the message

  11. Perils of Communication • “You should keep this booklet in a safe place for future reference……” • That’s all they ever do • The Golden Rule of Pension Communication: Nobody Ever reads thesmallprint

  12. Public Service Schemes • Generally suffer from poor communication • Worse as you get further from the centre • Circulars often incomprehensible – but very accurate! • Incomplete information, e.g., contributions to be repaid

  13. Problems I shouldn’t have…. • Some “complaints” can be disposed of quickly • I should not have to write to a complainant explaining the true meaning of a “communication” from scheme trustees • But it is the quickest way of closing the matter down

  14. Problems I can’t solve • Refusal of Early Retirement • Decisions to discontinue/ wind up • Conflict between scheme rules and employment contracts • (if the latter exist at all) • Shortcomings in scheme design, if the trustees have kept the Rules

  15. Design Flaws • Sometimes it’s not the administration of the scheme at all, but problems arising from the basic design of the scheme. • I can do nothing about bad design - though there have been some ex-gratia offers to complainants, where it is clear that the problem should have been foreseen

  16. Frequent complaints (design flaws) • Integration and the way it is applied • When pay doesn’t exceed State Pension increases, FPS goes down, but historic contributions were on higher rates • Pay based on basic, benefits on pensionable • Final Pay • e.g., three-year average for computing benefits but contributions based on annual pay not averaged • Contributing for more than 40 years – is there an equitable solution?

  17. Some Pitfalls of design – DB examples • Lack of flexibility – e.g., in death in service or retirement • Can we divert to non-spouse or same-sex dependant? Not in the public sector –ever • Must they have been married before retirement? • Cesser of benefits on remarriage/ cohabitation? • Have they even thought about separation and divorce? • Did the actuary assume people would commute benefits? • It may not happen now… • Members contribute for more than 40 years • And complain bitterly

  18. DB Pitfalls, continued • Unqualified statements – e.g., right to retire early • Consent of employer, trustees? • If no consent required, are benefits in danger? • S59G power helps, but only since 2005 • Late retirement: increases in deferment – may not apply to AVCs or other DC component

  19. Some Pitfalls of design – DC examples • Same contribution regardless of age at entry or point of change of scheme • Employees may bear all expenses • regulation now very expensive • Risk “First Charge” on contributions • Depletion of the fund • Risk of inadequate benefits • Results won’t be known for years • Risks of poor communication

  20. Risk as a First Charge • Schemes where risk is a first charge against small DC contributions can be a problem • Members don’t understand (and are rarely told) that increasing risk premiums may wipe out the contribution in due course- and then begin to eat up the accumulated fund • Salary increases will speed up the process • Accumulating fund not set off against risk benefit • Some intermediaries don’t understand this problem either!

  21. Target benefit - the risks • How was the target communicated? • Is it clear that the scheme is not a DB scheme any more? • Is member still in DB mode? • Did the scheme just continue the same contribution rate? • Won’t buy the same benefit, but member thinks it will

  22. Some Pitfalls of design – Target Benefit • Is it clear that we have changed from DB to “target” – and that “target” means DC? • What are expectations now? • Do they understand what DC means? • Are we clear about reviewing contributions? • Timing/frequency of reviews • Have we kept the promise to review? - In other words, how well have we communicated?

  23. The Challenge of the Hybrids • Hybrid schemes present new challenges to good communication • Most consist of DB and DC elements • -within the one scheme • There is no scope for shortcuts • Effective communication may cost more, but it’s less expensive in the long run!

  24. And finally…. • It is possible that there is too much regulation • What’s not needed is more of it • What is needed is compliance with and enforcement of what is there already - And don’t forget the Green Paper!

More Related