Example of two cases dealt with by the Pensions Ombudsman in 2006

Complaint: The maturity value of the complainant's AVC (additional voluntary contribution) policy - a form of tax efficient saving designed to help build up a fund of money for retirement in addition to a company pension plan - should have been higher than that quoted by the provider.

Finding: Both the assurance company and the brokers responsible for the administration of the scheme were guilty of maladministration after an initial correct valuation of the fund given to the complainant was overridden by a new lower valuation .

Outcome: The ombudsman directed the assurance company to value the complainant's policy using the maturity value as of August 2002 and to add to it the growth in the Exempt Cash Fund from August 2002 until the date of payment. Benefits due were also calculated and added to the final value.

Complaint: The complainant alleged significant financial loss as a result of the mismanagement of his policy by the insurance company as proven by the numerous errors it made in quoting transfer values since 2003.

Finding: The pension provider failed to grasp the importance of the complainant knowing the value of his fund in order to make the appropriate investment decisions in the run up to his retirement. As a result there was serious maladministration on the part of the pension provider in relation to the manner in which values were quoted to the complainant.

Outcome: The pension provider agreed to maintain a minimum maturity value on the total benefits at the maturity date of €196,661, which represented the total transfer value at November 6th 2006. If the actual maturity value in 2007 was higher, the provider agreed to pay the higher figure.