Welcome to your weekly update from the A&O Shearman Pensions team, covering all the latest legal and regulatory developments in the world of workplace pensions.
Summary
ICO guidance on new complaints process—data controllers get practical advice on complying with the new requirements.
Dashboards accessibility—PDP blog post on ensuring dashboards will suit those with accessibility needs.
TPR determination notice—an insight into when TPR will use its powers.
Finalised ICO guidance on new data complaints requirements
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has published guidance for data controllers on implementing a data protection-related complaints process under new requirements, which will come into force on June 19, 2026. The guidance gives practical advice on how data controllers can comply with the new requirements, including: how to identify a relevant complaint; ways in which you can enable people to make complaints; how to communicate with individuals; suggestions for a complaints procedure; and guidance on acknowledging, investigating and responding to complaints.
Read the guidance.
PDP: Blog post on dashboards accessibility
The Pensions Dashboards Programme (PDP) has published a blog post setting out the steps that are being taken to ensure that pensions dashboards are accessible to as wide a variety of users as possible, including people with disabilities or low digital skills and those who use assistive technologies. These steps include design adaptations, consideration of the identity verification process, and user testing including individuals with accessibility needs.
Read the blog post.
TPR exercises power to vest scheme assets in new trustee
The Pensions Regulator (TPR) has published a determination notice setting out its decision to make an order under section 9 of the Pensions Act 1995 to vest the assets of the Vedius Pension Trust (the Scheme) in an independent trustee. This gives an insight into TPR’s reasoning when exercising its powers in relation to non-compliant schemes.
TPR had previously exercised its power to appoint the independent trustee after it was identified that the Scheme did not have the required number of trustee directors. There were also concerns that there was no trustee with the required trustee knowledge and understanding who could act without a conflict of interest. There was uncertainty over whether the Scheme’s assets had vested in the independent trustee; the independent trustee has since encountered difficulties trying to identify and secure the transfer of Scheme assets into its control. It therefore asked TPR to intervene. The Case Panel concluded that, in these circumstances, it was cost effective and appropriate to make an order vesting the assets in the independent trustee.
Read the determination notice.
[View source.]
