Agenda item

12:10

This report updates the Committee on the latest position on administration issues.

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to:

(a)         note the report;

(b)         agree the Fund meets the tax cost associated with the late payment of death grant arising from administrative error as set out in parapraph1 11-12;

(c)         determine payment of the death grant for the case set out in paragraphs 13-18;

(d)         confirm changes to administration strategy as set out in paragraph 31.

The Committee had before it a report which updated members on scheme administration and date issues.

In relation to paragraphs 2 – 3 of the report, Mrs Fox reported that there had been two resignations, with potentially another.  Recruitment to replace the staff had already started and in view of the end of year work, one team member had been seconded from benefits to the employer team until August 2020.

In relation to paragraphs 9-17 of the report, Mrs Fox drew to the Committee’s attention two Death Grant cases for decision.  On the first case, unfortunately due to an administrative error, permission was sought from the Committee to agree that the fund should pay £12,671.65 tax, which had resulted from a death grant being paid late and therefore incurring 45% tax charge.

The second case requiring a decision from the Committee was that of a member who had died in service on 21 September 2019, who had not registered any next of kin details on file including an ‘expression of wish’ form.

However, the employer subsequently provided the name and contact details for a daughter who duly completed a pension declaration form stating that she was the only person with an interest in the death grant payable from the fund. However, during several telephone calls it found that there was also a son, living in Australia.  Initially, the son informed Pension Services that he did not have any interest in receiving part of any death grant payment but later conversations revealed that this decision was based on incorrect information supplied by his sister and so he then made declaration as an interested party. He also included a granddaughter (daughter of deceased sister) on this declaration.

The member’s will leaves her estate to be split between the five grandchildren when they attain the age of 25. The death grant does not form part of the estate and was payable at Pension Fund discretion. This was a significant amount in excess of £100,000, and there were various options in how payment could be made:

·            50/50 split between sister and brother

·            A percentage paid to sister and brother with the remainder being split between grandchildren

·            Payment split equally between grandchildren only

It should be noted that the fund had been advised that the initial claimant has paid £700 in respect of funeral costs out of her own funds.  The Committee was asked to consider how the Death Grant should be paid.

The Committee requested that measures be put in place to ensure that the oversight did not happen again and that the importance of taking written notes be reiterated to the staff.  Mrs Fox reported that they were reviewing all other cases to check death tasks and that staff has been reminded of the importance of accurate recording.

Councillor Mathews felt that the death grant should be a 3 way split to include the granddaughter in her own right.  District Councillor Jo Robb felt that the middle option of a percentage paid to the sister and brother with the remainder being split between the grandchildren was the fairest option.

Councillor Mark Lygo moved and Councillor John Sanders seconded the first option of a 50/50 split between sister and brother.

The motion was put to the vote and was carried by 7 votes to 3 (Councillor Charles Mathew requested that his dissent be recorded).

RESOLVED: to:

(a)       note the report;

(b)       agree the Fund meets the tax cost associated with the late payment of death grant arising from administrative error as set out in parapraph1 11-12 10-11;

(c)        (by 7 votes to 3, Councillor Charles Mathew requesting that his dissent be recorded) agree a 50/50 split between sister and brother payment of the death grant for the case set out in paragraphs 13-18 12-17;

(d)       confirm changes to administration strategy as set out in paragraph 31 31-33.