Legal Proceedings by HPA

[finneyb]

Worth asking the Pensions Team

[Jane Tordoff]

40 years ago, the Group Board were members of The Halcrow Director's Pensions Scheme, no real difference between their scheme and the one for the rest of the staff.  On 1 March 1993 the main board and the directors became part of the Halcrow Pension Scheme. MSF and Tony Cadwallander amalgamated the two schemes, with the actuary's approval. At the time of the amalgamation both schemes were in surplus.

[sallen]

I would like to add my thanks to Steve, Edward, John, Jane and all others involved in this pursuing and challenging this depressing arrangement.

I agree this needs to be brought to the attention of the press, public and relevant authorities to help ensure any future arrangements are held to account, and that other organisations considering following this route have second thoughts.

Given the information elicited by the hard work of the HPA committee, I found the comments in DJP's recent letter dated 29 July 2016 ".......we would strongly encourage you not to rely on the views of individuals or organisations who may have no relevant expertise, no proper understanding of the proposals and who carry no legal responsibility for what they choose to say." to be deeply offensive, patronising and revealing a mindset and defensiveness within the Trustee and Administrator group that has hampered HPS for many years.   

[tonyfoster]

I have made preliminary contact with US lawyers about a possible $532 million class action suit against CH2M on a no-win, no-fee basis. Typical slice for the lawyers is 1/3 of winnings, so it might be temping. I am advised that class action suits by pensioners are currently seen as a very profitable area for law companies in the US.
Early days, but lets see what develops.
I  shall not be signing the form as I wish to preserve my rights to a full HPS pension unless a better deal can be struck.

I have also been in contact with two US lawyers regarding potential class action against CH2M on a no win no fee basis.
Seem this is becoming a real possibility.

It could take years though any many pensioners may have passed away before they collect.

Perhaps it might be better if there could be a compromise. Between Option A and the original HPS.

CH2M do not seem the compromising type so perhaps ultimately the class action option will be the only way.

Not good for CH2M as it will impact their balance sheet for years and not good for pensioners as they might be dead before they collect their lost pension benefits.

As Steve said lets see what develops.

[Tim SMITH]

That compromise (ref Tony's post above) might come about regardless of CH's wishes if the CJEU rules that pensioners in receipt of PPF compensation must receive at least half of any entitlements to annual increases in their pension. I don't know what the probability is. Please see my posts here (Replies 39 and 40):

http://www.halcrowpensioners.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=164.new;topicseen#new