Source · Select Committees · Work and Pensions Committee
Recommendation 30
30
Paragraph: 119
Project Bloom is a multi-agency task force set up to tackle pension fraud in 2012.
Conclusion
Project Bloom is a multi-agency task force set up to tackle pension fraud in 2012. It is not a statutory body and receives no dedicated funding. The members of Project Bloom have argued convincingly to us that it has the potential to be an effective body but is restricted by limited resources. The Pensions Regulator and other organisations suggested to us Project Bloom should also be supported by a pension scams hub staffed by officials from the different members of Project Bloom working alongside law enforcement.
Paragraph Reference:
119
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
It is unlikely to be in a member’s best interest to transfer out of a scheme before attempts to recover assets have been concluded. Savers who left the scheme early would potentially miss out on an independent trustees (IT) work to recover stolen funds. ITs can also minimise the impact of tax liabilities, which could potentially further reduce the money returned to those transferring out. In many cases, the majority of a scam scheme’s funds are gone before an IT is appointed – meaning there would be little value for an individual member to transfer. We know being the victim of a pension scam is devastating. Equally, we understand how disappointing it must be for savers to find that IT charges have reduced the amount that can be returned to them further. An IT’s investigation is crucial in recovering as much value as possible for victims, but the cost and complexity of these are high. Scam schemes typically have no meaningful administration or financial records. Documentation is often deficient or needs legal input and, sometimes, court direction. Where schemes have been used as a vehicle for pension liberation, there can also be complex tax issues to deal with. Without an IT investigation, it is unclear how stolen funds could be recovered and returned to victims due to the difficulty in matching members with their funds thanks to typically poor recordkeeping present in scam schemes. Responses to the Committee’s Fifth Report of Session 2019–21 21