Your browser is out of date, and unable to use many of the features of this website

Please upgrade your browser.

Ignore

ITV should now offer financial support to Box Clever pension scheme

Ref: PN19-25

Issued: Thursday 20 June 2019

The Pensions Regulator (TPR) is again calling on ITV to fund the Box Clever pension scheme following another court ruling that TPR was right to use its powers to seek financial support.

The Court of Appeal today dismissed ITV’s challenge to a decision by the Upper Tribunal last year, namely that a Financial Support Direction should be issued to ITV in relation to the Box Clever scheme, which has 2,800 members and a deficit of around £115 million.

Today’s judgment follows a week-long appeal hearing in May 2019.

Erica Carroll, TPR’s Director of Enforcement, said: “ITV has raised numerous legal challenges against our actions for over seven years in a bid to avoid responsibility for the Box Clever scheme.

“Both the Upper Tribunal and now the Court of Appeal have confirmed that ITV should provide financial support to the scheme. Disappointingly, ITV sought the Court of Appeal’s permission to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, however we are pleased that this was refused.

“We hope that ITV will finally accept its responsibility and work with us so that a good outcome can be achieved for members.”

Box Clever was formed in 2000 as a joint venture between the TV rental businesses of Granada (now ITV) and Thorn (now Carmelite). Respective employees were transferred to the new company and enrolled in the Box Clever pension scheme.

TPR opened an anti-avoidance investigation following the collapse of Box Clever. Prior to the collapse, ITV extracted significant value from the joint venture.

Notes for editors

  1. In 2011, TPR issued a determination notice outlining why it was reasonable to issue FSDs to five companies that formed part of the ITV Group. An FSD requires its target to propose how they will financially support the scheme. For example, the target could assume responsibility for the employer’s liabilities to the scheme or make a lump sum cash payment into the scheme. If TPR considers that the proposal is reasonable it will issue a notice approving the arrangements.
  2. ITV originally referred the case to the Upper Tribunal in January 2012 to challenge TPR’s determination to issue FSDs and began its further challenge of TPR’s ability to submit additional evidence in late 2013.
  3. A number of hearings followed, including an earlier appeal to the Court of Appeal (and an unsuccessful application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court), before the Upper Tribunal found in TPR’s favour on the additional evidence challenge in 2016. ITV then made subsequent requests for permission to appeal.
  4. The substantive hearing before the Upper Tribunal took place in January 2018 with judgment issued in May 2018. The May 2019 hearing in the Court of Appeal dealt with the targets’ challenge of the Upper Tribunal’s May 2018 decision.
  5. TPR is the regulator of work-based pension schemes in the UK. Our statutory objectives are: to protect members’ benefits; to reduce the risk of calls on the Pension Protection Fund (PPF); to promote, and to improve understanding of, the good administration of work-based pension schemes; to maximise employer compliance with automatic enrolment duties; and to minimise any adverse impact on the sustainable growth of an employer (in relation to the exercise of TPR’s functions under Part 3 of the Pensions Act 2004 only).

Press contacts

David Morley
Media Officer (DB)
pressoffice@tpr.gov.uk
01273 662091
Matt Adams
Media Relations Manager
pressoffice@tpr.gov.uk
01273 662086

Share this page

  • Facebook
  • Linked In
  • Twitter