Although the decision relates to an application under the NHS Pension Scheme, it has wider implications for decision makers making similar decisions under other schemes, including the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS).
Background and decision
The Deputy Ombudsman’s decision concerned an application for ill-health early retirement by an NHS Estates Support Worker, Mr Hayes. Mr Hayes had been on long-term sick leave with several conditions including neuralgic pain since July 2008 and his employment was terminated on the grounds of capability in March 2009. NHS Pensions denied the application on the basis that Mr Hayes’s treatment was on-going and it was premature to conclude that his incapacity would be permanent, quoting at length from the medical adviser. Mr Hayes’s subsequent appeals were unsuccessful, despite the argument made on his behalf by his wife that he did not want to have further surgery due to the potential risks. The final appeal decision did not consider this argument.
The Deputy Ombudsman held that NHS Pensions misinterpreted the rules of the scheme which required it to take into account Mr Hayes’ view of whether it was reasonable to refuse the proposed treatment options (not just the medical view as to their likely risks). NHS Pensions had not done so. The Deputy Ombudsman therefore returned the decision to NHS Pensions for reconsideration and directed that they pay Mr Hayes £250 for the additional stress caused by their failure to determine his eligibility in the proper manner.
The Deputy Ombudsman also commented on the level of detail that decisions should contain. He noted that there has been a trend towards increased recognition of the duty on decision makers to give reasons, particularly in cases where some or all of the following apply:
- there is a right of appeal;
- the decision maker is acting in a judicial manner;
- the decision is of a particular significance to the individual; and
- there is no specific reason not to give reasons.
He commented that bearing these factors in mind, the level of reasoning that NHS Pensions would be required to provide in these sorts of circumstances would be “towards the upper end of the spectrum”. He went on to say that he hoped they would now provide their “full reasons in plain and simple language”.
Comment
The Deputy Ombudsman’s decision means that when giving decisions on ill health retirement, decision makers should take care to give full reasons using simple language if they refuse an application for ill-health early retirement. They should also ensure that they pay close attention to the relevant rules of their scheme and ensure these are followed.
For more advice on decisions to grant ill health retirement pensions, or in relation to appeals under the internal dispute resolution procedure, please contact Doug Mullen on 0121 212 7432 or douglas.mullen@anthonycollins.com.
Latest news
Staying friends through a split
More couples are choosing to divorce as amicably as possible, demanding an increase for specialist mediation services and less contentious options, such as ‘collaborative law’. But is it really possible to split and stay friends?
Wednesday 19 February 2025
Read moreAnthony Collins reappointed following Cottsway Housing Association tender for housing services
Social purpose law firm, Anthony Collins, has been reappointed as the sole legal provider of housing services for Cottsway Housing Association (Cottsway) tender, continuing a partnership focused on improving communities.
Tuesday 18 February 2025
Read moreLatest webinars and podcasts
Podcast: Leasehold reform: Commonhold
Emma Lloyd and Raj Flora-Seehra explore the Government’s renewed focus on commonhold tenure
Monday 17 February 2025
Read morePodcast: Who gets the microwave? Episode 2 – Non-court dispute resolution
Listen to the second in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team where Tom Gregory, Chris Lloyd-Smith and Maria Ramon put down their litigation weapons and discuss the importance of […]
Friday 22 November 2024
Read more