You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
As you know my Dad died earlier this year. He changed his will a couple of months before dying and left everything to his new partner of 10 years, at which point myself and my sister washed our hands of it
However we received a letter from one of his pension funds the other week saying that the trustees had decided that we qualified as a beneficiary and would get 1/3 of the funds. Originally we thought the new partner felt guilty and had asked for it to be split as it was a relatively small amount (post retirement job) and she had asked my sister for both our details without saying why
I phoned her last night for the first time and got around to the pension payout and it turned out she hadn't ok'd it and was fuming they'd decided to split it and was also angry that his much larger Pension (from his City job that he took early retirement from in his late 50's) still hadn't paid her
So my question, because Pension Fund A came to the conclusion that it should be split 3 ways does it follow that Pension Fund B will/should come to the same
Do you know if there was any Expression of Wishes? Whilst not legally binding scheme administrators will normally consider these.
Beat me to it DB!
Ordinarily this will be the first stop for the pension trustee - quite possible that your dad didn't change his EoW to solely benefit his new partner. This may have been by mistake (Lots of people complete a form when they first take out a pension and then forget to amend it) or design. His new partner may simply have assumed that your dad's entire estate would automatically have come to her
Knowing my Dad, he probably never changed it or even put one in.
My parents were divorced 11 years ago and he immediatley bought a house with his "mistress". His original intention was that his share of the house would pass to her then onto me and my sister (never made any mention of other assets/pension). When it became obvious he was going to die shortly he changed his will to give everything to the new partner and as final kick in the teeth if she was to die in 28 days everything was to go to her kids
As I said the fact Pension company A has decided we should get a share has thrown me a curveball
in my case, my life insurance pays out outside of my estate - that is, if I died the money goes straight to the benifactors (wife + kids) rather than into the 'pot' then split from there. The reason for this is to avoid inheritance tax, and I think its pretty standard. I suspect pension payouts are the same, so changing the will would only make difference to assets that area already owned by your dad, the pension payout isn't so skips that and goes straight to whomever he told the pension people to give it to (seems like a expression of wishes is the form for this)
For a few years I sat on the pension committee at my old company. One of our tasks was to determine how a pension should be allocated in cases like this where there was no expression of wish. We had a set of guidelines to apply and these included considering all of the known family members.
Could be the case that you have had a group of pension trustees or committee members arrive at this decision.
There is probably an appeals process that she might access but if that happens they should also contact you for a statement.
I remember a few of these decisions where family splits were laid bare and we had to make some difficult decisions.
Cheers for that, another weird bit is the letter I received started "Thank you for your recent communication" when I've never written to them
So I guess the process is the partner writes to the Pension companies with a copy of the will to lay claim, then the committee sits to decide the validity of the claim/how to split it. the first I'll ever hear of it is if they decide to give anything to me
I doubt very much she'll dispute it but who knows as Pension B even though it was split 58/42 in my mums favour in the divorce should still be a sizeable amount
To answer your original question, no, the decision of one set of trustees should not influence another.
In any trust (and most private sector pension schemes are trusts), there will be formal rules. For instance, ours say that the potential beneficiaries are spouse, children, parents, grandparents, anyone else financially (inter)dependant, anyone named in the will, other descendants of grandparents and anyone named on an expression of wish. There is no 'order of importance' in the rules (unlike intestacy). The trustee must consider everyone and make their decision - this is precisely to avoid the issue of out of date nominations.
There is an appeals process, right up to the Pensions Ombudsman, but a decision is not likely to be overturned unless it is not one which a reasonable person could have reached. And paying a share to offspring seems reasonable, while also recognising his relationship. There is no obligation for trustees to record or publish their reasoning (although we are heading towards that, for transparency).
As you would fall under the beneficiaries definition in any pension scheme, you could write to the other to highlight your existence; if you have no interest in any payout, you can tell them and they should take it into account.
And the “thank you for your communication” is just a standard letter - ours should started with condolences if we'd not had previous communication but with everyone working from home a few details slip through.
The "thank you for your recent communication" will have been because it's a standard template letter - they're likely referring to whoever informed them of your Dad's passing and supplied them with a copy of the death cert.
Pension companies can find out about a pension holders death in multiple ways (and likely lead to the same standard letter being issued). Bereavement cases can in some cases unfortunately drag on for quite a long time while trustees, scheme administrators, pension co etc pass information between themselves, ask for more info from family / beneficiaries etc to determine who receives remaining benefits. Usually they'll follow what's on the beneficiary nomination / expression of wishes form but not always as they could have been written years ago.
@pyranha thanks for the insight, I could have phrased it better but logically if one set of trustees arrived at the 1/3 decision then surely the other set will conclude the same, assuming theres a defined set of rules/law?
Edit I'm not entirely comfortable with writing in to them but the thought of his partner, then in turn her kids getting all the money is equally as galling
@mehr it's possible, but they're independent of each other so could easily come to different conclusions. In our schemes, we have 2 trustees independently making a decision; if they agree we make payments; if they disagree, they discuss between themselves and either agree or refer to the full trustee board (8 people plus chairman) who decide by majority vote. There are lots of factors - eg a more recent nomination generally carries more weight than a decades old one, particularly if family circumstances have changed. The scheme will (should) have asked for details of potential beneficiaries, and for a statement outlining personal circumstances. I understand about not wanting to seem 'money grabbing'; it’s a difficult time and you need to do what best helps you and those about whom you care. If you can be comfortable with the possibility of getting nothing, that's a good start.
Mehr, if you're not concerned about a bust-up with your dad's partner put in claim/appeal to the trustees of the principal pension scheme.
The worst they can say is no.
You should write. I’ve also been a committee member making these sorts of decisions. There are no hard and fast rules, but the key thing is to show you’ve considered all relevant factors in reaching a reasonable decision. If you write and set out your views this increases the likelihood of you getting a payout. If you don’t care don’t write, but if you do then do!
Ps this is particularly the case as your dads will was changed late on in his life. That is the sort of thing that will cause trustees to pause for thought. In one case we had to deal with an amended expression of wish which had been signed on a deathbed!
We deal with Probate and this comes up quite often, where there is no expression of wishes from the deceased, or it is obviously out of date - following a divorce or similar - the pension trustees will write to the executors asking them for details of the family in order for them to make a decision. The executors then complete and return a form (hence the thank you for your correspondence) and the trustees base their decision on information that is given to them. The key word is discretionary. One set of trustees may choose to exercise their discretion differently to another neither is bound by anyone elses decision.
Hope that helps.
Cheers everyone
I've done a bit more digging and apparently an EoW was made for the larger pension in February (died April), I guess she claimed them around the same time and so far a decision hasn't been made (the first one made there decision on 6th July)
I'll not make a claim as despite it being a large sum and not particularly caring for her, it was his wish. If they decide I should be a beneficiary you'll see a new bike day post with an S-Works Enduro on the back of a T5