The Police Federation has taken legal advice regarding the changes in 1987 commutation factors that were published and came into immediate effect on 21 May 2026.

There is no general legal challenge to the implementation of the factors.

Officers who were directly affected by the changes, those that had made their irrevocable choice of benefits prior to the factor change and retired on or after 21 May 2026, would have a complaint for maladministration.

The basis of the complaint would be that it was maladministration for the police authorities to provide members with quotations of their pension entitlements, on the basis of which they made irrevocable decisions as to when to retire, and thereafter not honour those quotations.

Arguments that can be made; members had a legitimate expectation of having benefits at the level in the original quotations; that they should have been actively warned that there was a likelihood of imminent change to the factors, and that in all the circumstances it is unjust for police authorities to fail to provide benefits at the quoted level.

The individual circumstances and any particular issues encountered by the member would also be taken into account. This is particularly relevant where they could have retired before 21 May 2026 and would have considered that if they were aware of potential changes, even if they did not know which way the change would affect the commutation factors.

If a member had to delay their retirement due to administrative failings, then their case for maladministration would be particularly strong.

The outcome of claims for maladministration can be difficult to predict, given the breadth of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to go beyond specific legal breaches and consider the overall justice of the case.

We would expect him to be sympathetic to members who, through no fault of their own, and in circumstances in which they could have done nothing to avoid it, have made irrevocable decisions to retire on the basis of information that has turned out to be incorrect.

Where a maladministration claim succeeds, the Ombudsman can order that a member be put into the position that they would have been had the pension scheme been properly administered. Members can also be awarded modest sums for non-financial loss (generally £500 - £1000, and a maximum of £2000) to reflect stress and disappointment caused by the maladministration.

The Force Internal Dispute Resolution Process needs to be completed before a matter will be considered by the Pension Ombudsman.

XPS retirement choices form has a disclaimer included. The Met and maybe others have no such disclaimer.

Members who have signed retirement forms with a disclaimer

The XPS disclaimer states:

"Please note: Your benefits are calculated under the Pension Scheme Regulations and associated factors provided by the Government Actuary’s Department.

"Both the regulations and the factors are subject to amendment, often at very short notice. Although correct at the time of calculation, it cannot be guaranteed that future changes will not alter the level of benefits to which you are entitled."

This is going to make a complaint for maladministration more difficult.

The Ombudsman will look at the wording of the disclaimer and members should be aware that they signed a document with a disclaimer that stated that factors are subject to amendment at very short notice.

Members who have signed retirement forms without a disclaimer

We know the Met retirement forms did not have a disclaimer at the relevant time. Members who are not with XPS or the Met will need to check the retirement forms they signed.

Members have stronger claims for maladministration than officers whose statements contained a disclaimer.

Of course, in order to be entitled to financial losses for any such maladministration, these officers would still have to show that they have in fact suffered financial loss as a result of the maladministration itself.

There is nothing different in making the complaint other than to point out there was no disclaimer that the benefits could change and change at short notice. The legitimate expectation point would also be stronger as a result.

The Practicalities

• Obtain the Internal Dispute Resolution Process form from your ex-force.
• Detail when you received your statement of benefits and retirement forms.
• Detail when you signed and returned them to your force.
• If there was no disclaimer make the point that this was your irrevocable choice after completing your police service and there was nothing to say that the figures could change.
• If there was a disclaimer then it was still your irrevocable choice after completing your police service.
• Detail any issues the change has caused you, financial or otherwise.
• If you had been aware that there was going to be a change, were you in a position to retire before your eventual date of retirement?
• Enter the date you subsequently retired.
• Identify the loss you have suffered and any attempt from the force to claim that money back from you.

The IDRP process is a two-stage process completed by the force and if you are not satisfied with the outcome, you can then take the matter to the Pension Ombudsman.

The timescales for the IDRP will be included in the forms that you will be provided with.