To receive a verbal update.
Minutes:
The following sections were discussed and points noted:
Section D – Publishing Information about schemes
D1 – Does the Administering Authority publish information about the Pension Board? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
D2 – Does the Administering Authority publish other useful related information about the Pension Board? Members agreed that the website be updated to include a profile of the Local Pension Board members.
D3 – Is the information about the Pension Board kept up to date? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
D4 – Does the Administering Authority publish information about Pension Board business? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
Section I – Internal Dispute Resolution
I1 – Has the Administering Authority put in place an internal dispute resolution procedure? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant. The IDRP was being reviewed with LPP to ensure that it was up to date and included all required and additional helpful information as the current version was based on an old DCLG sample.
I2 – Does the Administering Authority’s process highlight or consider whether a dispute is exempt? The process would be included in the IDRP factsheet when the document was reviewed.
I3 – Does the information made available to applicants about the procedure clearly state the procedure and process to apply for a dispute to be resolved including: who it applies to; who the specific person (stage 1) is; the timescales for making applications; who to contact with a dispute; the information that an applicant must include; the process by which decisions are reached? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
I4 – Has the Administering Authority ensured that employers who make first stage decisions also have IDRP in place? Some of the scheme employers had published their stage 1 IDRP adjudicator details along with their scheme discretions, however all employers needed to be encouraged to do so although it was optional for employers to nominate stage 1.
I5 – Are the timescales in the procedure adhered to including sending an acknowledgement on receipt of an application? As yet, the London Borough of Havering had not had a formal IDRP complaint to process, however there was a policy and process in place and this would be reviewed.
I6 – Does the Administering Authority notify and advertise the procedure appropriately? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
I7 – Are the notification requirements in relation to TPAS and the Pensions Ombudsman being adhered to? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
I8 – Does the Administering Authority regularly assess the effectiveness of its arrangements? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
I9 – Does the Administering Authority regularly assess the effectiveness where employers carry out a stage one process? Members considered the requirement to be fully compliant.
Actions:
i) D2 - To provide a short profile for inclusion on the website - All members.
ii) I1 – To review the IDRP with LPP to ensure that it was up to date and included all required and additional helpful information as the current version was based on an old DCLG sample – Caroline Berry.
iii) I2 – Details of the process highlighting or considering whether a dispute is exempt to be included in the IDRP factsheet when it is reviewed – Caroline Berry.
iv) I5 – The policy and process for IDRP complaints to be reviewed – Caroline Berry.