IPA’s expectations of members regarding completion of Form RP15 and RP15A

IPA Insolvency Practitioner newsletter, November 2024

Over the last 18 months, a number of complaints from pension administrators concerning Forms RP15 and RP15A have been investigated by the regulation team, and a proportion of these have been referred to the Regulation and Conduct Committee.  Given the frequency of complaints and a divergence of approaches by members when in receipt of claims for outstanding pension contributions, we consider that it would be helpful to provide some feedback on the Committee’s findings to date and guidance on the IPA’s expectations.

For any readers unfamiliar with Forms RP15 and RP15A, they are an application for payment of outstanding pension scheme contributions in respect of insolvent employers.  Form RP15 comprises two parts, with part 1 to be completed by the administrator of the pension scheme detailing the claim and part 2 by the insolvency practitioner.  Part 2 is described as a payment validation form for a pension scheme and requires the insolvency practitioner to complete details of unpaid pension contributions and sign a declaration that the information given is correct and complete to the best of their knowledge and that they have examined the claim in accordance with Section 125 of The Pension Schemes Act 1993 (‘the Act’).  The form, together with Form RP15A giving details of individual employees, is then submitted to the Redundancy Payments Service (‘RPS’).  If RPS agree the claim, outstanding contributions, subject to statutory limits, are contributed to the pension scheme from the National Insurance Fund.

The majority of complaints we have received are that members have not co-operated with pension administrators, or not done so in a timely manner, and have failed to complete and submit Form RP15, or again not done so in a timely manner.  The Committee has made disciplinary findings in respect of such failings and is particularly concerned where cases have been closed with a pension claim unresolved and where IPs appear to have been prompted to act only following a complaint. 

However, in some instances the complaints have also raised concerns about the extent of verification work carried out by members in submitting Form RP15.  Members are reminded that Section 125 of the Act states that ‘an amount shall be taken as payable, paid or deducted … only if it is so certified by the relevant officer’.  Therefore, the Act places great onus on the role of the insolvency practitioner in certifying a claim for unpaid pension contributions, and this is reflected in the wording of the RP15 form.  In addition, guidance was issued by the Pension Protection Fund in November 2023 (Guidance Note 12 – completing RPS claim forms) which states that if the IP disagrees with the figures in part 1 of the form, they should be challenged with the trustees when the form is being completed.  The guidance states further that the purpose behind RPS requesting the information twice (parts 1 and 2) is so that it can see that the scheme’s records and the employer’s records match, and that the insolvency practitioner, as the representative of the employer, has corroborated the scheme’s claim. 

In summary, it is not sufficient to accept the figures provided by the pensions administrator and replicate those into part 2 of Form RP15.  From a regulatory perspective we will wish to see evidence that there has been some verification and cross checking with the employer’s records.  This reinforces the message in SIP 2 that the office holder should locate and secure books and records, including employee and payroll records, at the earliest opportunity.  Recognising that there are instances where it may simply not be possible to obtain such records, members should be able to demonstrate that they have made reasonable efforts to do so.  In such situations, it would be acceptable to send Form RP15 to the RPS with part 2 not completed, provided this is accompanied by a covering explanation.

Finally, in some cases a situation has arisen where there has been a sale of the business and assets and a transfer of employees under the TUPE Regulations 2006 prior to the date of formal insolvency.  In such instances there appears to be some uncertainty as to whether any liability for outstanding pension contributions transfers to the purchaser or whether it remains with the insolvent employer.  Whilst in the case of most occupational pension schemes there is likely to be an exemption from TUPE provisions so that liability is retained by the employer, there are exceptions to the exemption, and we would suggest that specialist advice is taken on a case by case basis.  As regulator, we would expect members to establish the correct position regarding liability before submitting Form RP15 to ensure that claims are only validated by the member if appropriate.

If members have any concerns about forms they have submitted or further information to provide, they should contact the Redundancy Payments Service at RPS.Stakeholder@insolvency.gov.uk.