Sweet Time (3) Limited v The Pensions Regulator
[2023] UKFTT 86 (GRC)
London City Housing Limited v The Pensions Regulator
3 March 2023
[2023] UKFTT 262 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A company didn't pay pension contributions on time and didn't respond to a notice about it. They said they didn't get the notice and were struggling financially because of the pandemic, but the judge said they still had to pay the fine because the notice was properly sent and there was no good reason for their delay.
Key Facts
- •London City Housing Ltd (Appellant) appealed a £400 fixed penalty notice from The Pensions Regulator (Respondent) for non-compliance with an unpaid contributions notice (UCN).
- •The UCN, sent July 13, 2022, to the Appellant's registered office, required calculation of unpaid contributions, payment to the pension provider, and evidence of compliance by August 23, 2022.
- •The Appellant did not comply by the deadline; the fixed penalty notice was issued September 9, 2022.
- •The Appellant claimed non-receipt of the UCN and provided evidence of compliance October 7, 2022, citing pandemic-related financial difficulties.
- •The Regulator argued that the presumption of service applied and late compliance was insufficient grounds for revoking the penalty.
Legal Principles
Employers have duties regarding automatic enrolment of employees into pension schemes (Pensions Act 2008).
Pensions Act 2008
The Regulator can issue UCNs for unpaid contributions and fixed penalty notices for non-compliance.
Pensions Act 2008
Service of notices is presumed if sent to the proper address (registered or principal office for companies).
Pensions Act 2004, section 303(2)(c), 303(6)(a); Employers' Duties (Registration and Compliance) Regulations 2010, Regulation 15(4)
The Tribunal considers whether a reasonable excuse exists for non-compliance with a UCN.
Pensions Regulator v Strathmore Medical Practice [2018] UKUT 104 (AAC)
A mere assertion of non-receipt of a notice does not overturn the presumption of service.
London Borough of Southwark v (1) Runa Akhter v (2) Stel LLC 2017 UKUT
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Tribunal found the UCN was properly served, the Appellant did not provide sufficient evidence of non-receipt, and late compliance, even with pandemic-related financial hardship, did not constitute a reasonable excuse for failing to meet the UCN's requirements.
Similar Cases
Peoples Care Limited v The Pensions Regulator
[2023] UKFTT 769 (GRC)
Sacha Lejune Hair Limited v The Pensions Regulator
[2023] UKFTT 261 (GRC)
A & P Trading Solutions Limited v The Pensions Regulator
[2023] UKFTT 772 (GRC)
Comserv Contracting & Commercial Ltd v The Pensions Regulator
[2024] UKFTT 579 (GRC)