The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO) has upheld a complaint against Gunns Bakery for failing to pay contributions into a worker’s Nest pension due to maladministration.

The group was ordered to pay £408.91 into the scheme, as well as ensure that the complainant, Mrs E, is not financially disadvantaged by its maladministration by arranging for any investment loss to be calculated and paid into the scheme.

The employer was also ordered to pay Mrs E £1,000 for the serious distress and inconvenience it has caused her.

Mrs E complained that the employer, despite deducting contributions from her pay, failed to pay them into the scheme.

TPO asked the employer for more information in response to Mrs E’s complaint on 25 May 2023, but no response was received.

On 14 July 2023, TPO repeated this request to the employer, to which the employer responded that it would reply within 48 hours. No further response was received.

Given this, a caseworker reviewed the case and concluded further action was required by the employer as it had failed to remit the contributions due to the scheme.

In response, the employer agreed that the contributions deducted had not been paid into the scheme but did not agree with the award of £1,000 for distress and inconvenience.

The complaint would be passed to an ombudsman for a determination and the deputy pension ombudsman, Anthony Arter, agreed with the caseworker’s opinion.

In his decision, Arter stated: “I find that employee contributions were deducted but held back by the employer and not paid into the scheme. The employer failed to rectify this and did not properly engage with either my office or Mrs E.

“The employer’s failure to pay employee and employer contributions into the scheme amounts to unjust enrichment and has caused Mrs E to suffer a financial loss. The employer shall take remedial action to put this right.

“Mrs E is entitled to a distress and inconvenience award in respect of the serious ongoing non-financial injustice which she has suffered. This was exacerbated by its failure to respond during TPO’s investigation into Mrs E’s complaint.”

---