HI Health Ltd v The Pensions Regulator [2026] UKFTT 1116 (GRC)
[1]The Appellant seeks to appeal against a Fixed Penalty Notice issued by the Respondent on 4 February 2026 in the sum of £400.[2]By case management directions, the Tribunal raised a concern that it might lack jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and directed the Appellant to provide further information and documents concerning any review undertaken by the Respondent.[3]In response, the Appellant completed the Tribunal's "Pensions – Right to Appeal" form. He was thereby given an opportunity to provide representations as to why the appeal should not be struck out for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to rule 8 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. The Appellant explained that a review application had been made to the Respondent but accepted that the Respondent had declined to carry out a review on the basis that the application had been made outside the statutory 28-day time limit. The Appellant nevertheless submitted that the Respondent's refusal correspondence should be treated as a review decision for the purposes of establishing a right of appeal.[4]The Appellant provided the Respondent's review outcome correspondence. In that correspondence the Respondent stated that the Appellant's review application had been received after the 28-day deadline prescribed by law. The Respondent further stated that it had determined not to carry out a review and expressly confirmed that "no review has been conducted".[5]The Tribunal's jurisdiction in a pension’s penalty appeal is statutory. A right of appeal arises only in the circumstances provided for by the governing legislation.[6]The material before the Tribunal establishes that the Appellant's application for review was made outside the statutory 28-day period and that the Respondent decided not to conduct a review. The Respondent expressly stated in its review outcome correspondence that no review had been conducted.[7]The Appellant submits that the Respondent's refusal to undertake a review should itself be treated as a review decision giving rise to a right of appeal. I do not accept that submission. A decision declining to undertake a review because a review application was received out of time is not the conduct of a review. The evidence before the Tribunal demonstrates that no review was undertaken.[8]In those circumstances, the statutory preconditions giving rise to a right of appeal have not been satisfied.[9]The Tribunal therefore lacks jurisdiction to determine the appeal.[10]Pursuant to rule 8(2)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, the proceedings are struck out on the basis that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction in relation to the appeal. Signed Date: Judge Kiai 4th August 2026