Pensions - Articles - Comment on Hughes v Royal London Group


Commenting on the judgement in the case Hughes v. Royal London Group a Royal London spokesman said:

 “Pensions Liberation and pensions fraud raise serious concerns for providers like Royal London. We therefore take transfer requests very seriously and look out for the warning signs highlighted by the Regulators and relevant guidance. In spite of what we might find, if a customer has a statutory right to a transfer then there is very little we can do if the customer wants to proceed. The transfer must be allowed.

 This judgement provides greater clarity on the circumstances which determine when that statutory right exists and we will obviously comply with the Court Order relating to Ms Hughes’ transfer.
 
 Royal London’s concern has only ever been to comply with the Regulatory guidance and to assist our policyholders to avoid circumstances where they risk losing all or part of their pension benefits.”
  

Back to Index


Similar News to this Story

Covenant is crucial to any pension schemes risk management
Emily Goodridge, Managing Director, Cardano, a business of Marsh McLennan, said: “Covenant is a crucial element of any pension scheme’s risk managemen
TPR publish first AFS under the new DB funding code
TPR’s first AFS published under the new DB funding code sets expectations for focus on endgame planning. The Pensions Regulator (TPR) expects most sch
Comments on The Pensions Regulators annual funding statement
Initial Comments on The Pensions Regulators Annual Funding statement from Standard Life, PMI, ACA, Broadstone and XPS Group

Site Search

Exact   Any  

Latest Actuarial Jobs

Actuarial Login

Email
Password
 Jobseeker    Client
Reminder Logon

APA Sponsors

Actuarial Jobs & News Feeds

Jobs RSS News RSS

WikiActuary

Be the first to contribute to our definitive actuarial reference forum. Built by actuaries for actuaries.