Blog

Survivor benefits equalisation: The hidden challenges LGPS funds may face

calendar icon 25 September 2026
time icon 3 min

Authors

Con Hargrave
Opens in new window

Con Hargrave

GAP Consultant

Laura Guest 2
Opens in new window

Laura Guest

GAP Consultant

For many Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) funds in England and Wales, the McCloud rectification will be nearing completion or indeed now completed. However, the need to revisit historic cases is far from over. As attention turns to survivor benefits equalisation following the Access and Fairness changes, further rectification work will still be required. 

With funds now getting to grips with the scope and complexity of rectification exercises, we examine five challenges that may be flying under the radar. Thankfully, though, support is available – our new Survivor Benefits Handbook will help funds to implement the remedy. 

1. The knock-on impact on children's pensions 

Where a spouse's, civil partner's or cohabiting partner's pension changes as a result of equalisation, there may be consequences for linked children's pensions. In some cases, the amount of an eligible child’s pension is directly impacted by the existence or value of another survivor's pension. 

This means funds may need to look beyond the individual case being reviewed and consider whether connected children’s pensions also require reassessment when a partner’s pension changes. Although it should be noted that the government has helpfully confirmed that there is no requirement for any recovery of children’s pensions which were paid at a higher rate before any equalisation. 

2. Paying survivor pensions for the first time 

One of the more unusual consequences of equalisation is that some individuals may become entitled to a survivor pension where no benefit was previously payable. This may occur in situations where a member only had LGPS service before 6 April 1988. The Access and Fairness changes mean that membership before this date can now be included in their survivor’s pension for the first time. 

For those cases, the calculation is only the starting point. Funds may need to locate beneficiaries they have never had contact with, verify identities, obtain supporting documentation and establish payment arrangements. 

Many of these cases could involve events that occurred years, or even decades, ago. Names may have changed, addresses may be out of date and records may be incomplete. Using tracing services may therefore be necessary and the costs of these could build up. 

3. An issue that may never fully disappear 

There can be a temptation to view survivor benefits equalisation as a one-off project with a clear start and finish date. 

In reality, the work may continue long after the initial exercise has been completed. 

New information can emerge over time. A previously unknown beneficiary may come forward. Historic records may reveal an entitlement that was not identified during the original review.  

This could particularly be an issue for death grant rectification. If a death grant was not originally paid as the member died over the age of 75, there may now be a death grant due. However it may be hard to identify who to make payment to if years have passed and there was not a survivor pension payable at the time. It’s possible beneficiaries may come out of the woodwork for years to come. 

4. A potential rise in complaints and enquiries 

Many beneficiaries will welcome the changes. However, retrospective corrections can also generate difficult conversations. 

Even where a fund has acted entirely in accordance with the regulations that applied at the time, members and beneficiaries may still feel frustrated or confused when they learn that benefits are changing years later. In cases where a beneficiary has died, family members may seek explanations regarding historic payments and entitlement decisions. 

As a result, funds should be prepared for an increase in enquiries, complaints and requests for clarification. Clear communication will be every bit as important as accurate calculations. 

5. The sheer technical complexity 

Whilst the policy intent brings consistency in how survivor benefits are calculated, this creates a lot of practical complication. 

This is particularly so given how much survivor benefits have evolved in the LGPS over the years. There are also many subtle differences from one scenario to another, and these can vary depending on when a member left active membership or when they died. 

As funds work through cases that for many will number in the thousands, close attention to detail will be required to ensure the finer points are reflected in the final calculations. This should reduce the possibility of further rectification work being required again in the future. 

Piecing it all together 

The survivor benefits changes are undoubtedly a technical challenge. The period up to January 2028, the government’s stated deadline for the rectification work, will be challenging.  

To support funds in their work on this, in recent months we have been developing a Survivor Benefits Handbook. We are delighted to be launching this via a webinar on 5 October – please register at the link below. 

As with our McCloud Handbook, the core aim is to give you access to a resource that breaks down the complexity whilst remaining technically accurate and detailed so that you can use it and refer back to it. This time around, we’ve taken that principle one step further. We have an interactive tool that we believe will become an essential resource for administrators working on their survivor rectification projects in the coming year. 

Covering LGPS survivor benefits and death grants rules generally, not just Access and Fairness, the Handbook will be a helpful resource for many years to come. We’re delighted to be making it available to funds in the coming weeks.  

For more information on the LGPS Survivor Benefits Handbook, get in touch or register for the demonstration webinar here. 

register here

This blog is based upon our understanding of events as at the date of publication. It is a general summary of topical matters and should not be regarded as financial advice. It should not be considered a substitute for professional advice on specific circumstances and objectives. Where this blog refers to legal matters please note that Hymans Robertson LLP is not qualified to provide legal opinion and therefore you may wish to obtain independent legal advice to consider any relevant law and/or regulation. Please read our Terms of Use - Hymans Robertson.

 

Sign up for our mailing list

We pride ourselves on being thought leaders and are constantly discussing the many issues facing and shaping our industry. Sign up to find our current thinking on topical issues.

Opens in new window Subscribe
  • Latest industry news

  • First access to upcoming events

  • Content tailored to your interests

  • Access to exclusive content

Opens in new window Subscribe