Why did Capita make my 81 year old mother wait nine months for her widow’s pension: STEVE WEBB replies

My father, who received a civil service pension, died in November 2025.

For months after his death, my mother received no correspondence from Capita regarding her husband’s pension, although they returned the death certificate in December.

I sent a complaint letter in April, which has not even been acknowledged, although I confirmed by phone that it was received.

After eight weeks I contacted the Pensions Ombudsman and was told that a form needed to be completed to make a complaint.

It didn’t want more detail than what was in my original letter, so I’m not sure why that wouldn’t be enough.

I understand that Capita now has four months to respond. By then my father will have been dead for twelve months.

I have also contacted my MP, who has contacted Capita, but that doesn’t seem to have any effect either.

I feel like those affected have nowhere to turn to get these problems resolved.

What was supposedly a simple task (take my father’s pension amount, halve it, and there you have my mother’s pension amount) has now become much more complicated.

There will now also be payment arrears and I assume that interest and possibly compensation will have to be calculated. The tax implications of income pooling will also need to be considered.

For my 81-year-old mother, it’s all just too much.

Steve Webb replies: I was very sorry to read about the loss of your father last year, and the additional suffering caused to you and your mother by the way Capita handled things.

It is completely unacceptable that a widow has to wait so long for a pension that her deceased husband has earned and which is rightfully hers.

I am pleased to say that you have now been contacted about the details of your mother’s widow’s pension, but I was shocked when you told me that even in Capita’s letter to your local MP stating that matters had been resolved, your father’s name was wrong.

Your experiences raise quite fundamental questions for me about what people can do if their pension provider does not respond, and also about how these types of contracts are awarded in the first place.

As you understand, the normal process when the administration of a pension scheme is inadequate is for you to complain directly to the scheme.

All schemes must have an internal dispute resolution process and you will normally be expected to exhaust this before going to an Ombudsman.

In your case, you waited a number of months for your mother to receive benefits and then filed a complaint directly. But you received no response, leaving you in limbo.

You then approached the Pensions Ombudsman. This has a standard complaints form and asks people to fill it out.

I understand your point that you felt your letter contained all the relevant information, but I also understand why it would be more efficient for an organization dealing with thousands of complaints if they were all submitted via a standard form.

Although I think the Pensions Ombudsman does valuable work, in this case it was unlikely that a complaint to the Ombudsman would help the matter.

It can sometimes take up to a year for the Ombudsman to hear a case, and your mother’s needs were clearly more urgent.

You contacted your local MP, who in turn contacted Capita, adding to the literally thousands of complaints the company has received from MPs.

When I contacted Capita on your behalf at the end of July, I was told that your mother’s case was on an ‘escalation list’, presumably because of the MP’s letter.

But after that we didn’t hear anything for weeks.

Ultimately, you and your MP received confirmation that the pension was being paid, although you told me that the letter your mother received was confusing as to what would be paid and when.

The correspondence shows that Capita plans to pay interest on late payments and will also consider payments for ‘distress and inconvenience’ where people have had to wait a long time or have been in particular need.

But it will do this in two stages, first carrying out all interest calculations and then considering further compensation.

When I spoke to Capita last week, the company said it had dramatically increased the speed at which it processes cases, including ‘bulk processing’ of more basic cases, and that this was helping to clear the backlog.

A Capita spokesperson said: ‘We continue to work with the government to resolve the operational issues.

‘Despite the progress made to date, we recognize that the service has not been good enough, particularly for members awaiting bereavement, retirement and tender matters, and we are sorry for the impact this has had on those members.

‘We now have the processes, automation and technology to close the backlog. We remain committed to clearing the backlog as quickly as possible, protecting members and ensuring new cases are processed within contractual service times.”

Some people have wondered why the government doesn’t simply strip Capita of the contract, given all that has happened since they took over just before Christmas last year.

One answer is that there isn’t a long line of companies that could take on this scale of work, especially in the short term.

Although there are numerous companies that carry out pension administration, there are really only three major players from which the government can choose, who could conceivably administer a scheme with millions of participants.

A petition was recently presented to Downing Street calling for the scheme’s management to be brought back in-house, and if I were a Secretary of State I would look seriously at this option.

But this is not something that can be done overnight and will almost certainly cause further disruption.

For the government, there is a delicate balancing act between ensuring that the public faces the consequences of what has happened while not creating more disruption at a time when it appears that some progress is finally being made.

Capita was keen to point out to me that it has contracts with the whole of government and that in the vast majority of cases it meets performance targets.

But there is no doubt that the company’s reputation has been seriously damaged by the way the civil servants’ pension scheme has been handled, and ministers will think very hard before awarding new contracts unless and until this whole mess is finally sorted out.