Pension Service gave woman incorrect information about state pension entitlements

What happened

The Pension Service sent Ms B a pension forecast that wrongly stated that she would inherit her late husband's additional state pension when she reached state pension age. In fact, she was not entitled to this. Ms B relied on this additional amount when she made decisions about her private pension and future income, only to find out afterwards that she would not receive the money when she reached state pension age.

Ms B complained about this to the Pension Service, saying that she had lost out financially because of its error. The Pension Service did not initially respond to her complaint in line with its complaints process. Eventually it decided that as she was not entitled to her late husband's additional pension, there was nothing further for it to do.

Ms B complained to the Independent Case Examiner (ICE), which criticised the Pension Service for the way it had handled the complaint and for giving Ms B the wrong information. It agreed that Ms B had not lost out financially because she was not entitled to Mr B's additional pension. It said that she should have got more information before making decisions about her future income. It recommended she receive a consolatory payment for poor complaint handling and for the wrong information the Pension Service gave her, but Ms B refused to accept this.

What we found

We partly upheld this complaint. We agreed with ICE about how the complaint was handled and that the Pension Service should not have sent Ms B the wrong information. However, we disagreed with its view that Ms B should have got advice after she had received the pension forecast that included Mr B's additional pension.

We told Ms B that she was entitled to expect that the Pension Service would give her the right information. We added that the information available to Ms B would not have shown that she was not entitled to Mr B's additional state pension.

Putting it right

When we looked at the injustice that Ms B said she had suffered, we saw that by the time she reached state pension age, her state pension entitlement had gone up. She had been expecting a certain amount of money based on the Pension Service's forecast. She received more than this. It was clear throughout the complaint that Ms B had not suffered a financial loss. We concluded that the consolatory payment already offered was fair in the circumstances.