Introduction: The PENSION FUND REGULATORY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (PFRDA) has received public comments on proposed amendments to the “Redressal of Subscriber Grievance” Regulations, 2015. This article delves into the responses provided to stakeholder concerns, addressing key aspects such as the role of the National Pension System Trust (NPST), filing procedures, and jurisdiction.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Role of NPST in Grievance Redressal: The proposed amendment emphasizes the active coordination of NPST in resolving grievances lodged with intermediaries. Stakeholders sought clarity on terms like ‘active coordination’ and requested specifics on NPST’s activities. The response maintains the status quo, asserting that no changes are proposed in the role of NPST in the grievance redressal mechanism.
2. Filing of GRP: Concerns were raised regarding the filing of the two-level grievance redressal policy. Stakeholders recommended filing only with a single entity, preferably the regulatory authority, PFRDA, to avoid ambiguity. The response clarifies that the policy should be filed with both PFRDA and NPST as they are integral to the grievance redressal mechanism.
3. Filing of Appeal with Ombudsman: Questions were raised about involving NPST in the resolution of grievances and the option to raise grievances against NPST. The response acknowledges that NPST is not involved in operational aspects and omits the reference to NPST in the context of filing an appeal with the Ombudsman.
4. Jurisdiction of Ombudsman: Stakeholders called for clarity on jurisdiction conflicts between the Ombudsman appointed by IRDAI and PFRDA. The response highlights that a grievance can be raised against an intermediary, with the term ‘intermediary’ already defined in the regulations.
Conclusion: This detailed analysis of responses to stakeholder comments on proposed PFRDA amendments provides valuable insights into the clarification of NPST’s role, filing procedures, and jurisdiction matters. The responses aim to address concerns raised by stakeholders and ensure a transparent and effective grievance redressal mechanism within the regulatory framework.
****
Response to Stakeholder / Public Comments on the proposed amendments to PFRDA (Redressal of Subscriber Grievance) Regulations, 2015
PENSION FUND REGULATORY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Response to Stakeholder / Public Comments on the proposed amendments to PFRDA (Redressal of Subscriber Grievance) Regulations, 2015
|
S. No. |
Subject Matter | Stakeholder/Public Comments |
Response to stakeholder / public comments |
| 1 | Role of NPST in grievance redressal
The National Pension System Trust shall actively coordinate for the resolution of all the grievances lodged with the intermediaries or entities directly or in the Central Grievance Management System, as well as received directly at their end within the turnaround time specified under regulation 6. Further, the National Pension System Trust shall be required to monitor and periodically conduct review and perform oversight on the grievance management system in respect of schemes under the National Pension System. The National Pension System Trust shall, forward to the Authority, reports on its review and oversight, within such period as may be specified by the Authority. |
The term ‘active coordination’ is not clear. The role of NPS Trust envisaged in this regard should be clearly spelt out and the activities to be performed by NPS Trust in ‘active coordination’, ‘periodically conduct review’ and ‘perform oversight on the grievance management system’, may be specifically mentioned. The grievances received directly by the entities or intermediaries are not lodged in CGMS cannot be accessed by NPS Trust. | No changes are proposed in the role of NPST in grievance redressal mechanism. |
| 2 | Filing of GRP
Every two level grievance redressal policy to be filed with the Authority or the National Pension System Trust shall be placed in the public domain, including the website and preferably displayed in Hindi, English and other applicable regional languages by each intermediary under the National Pension System and by any other pension scheme regulated by the Authority. |
In order to avoid ambiguity and to bring clarity in filing, the policy should be filed only with single entity. Being a policy matter, it should be filed with the regulatory authority, PFRDA. | The GRP is required to be filed with PFRDA and NPS Trust since they are part of the grievance redressal mechanism. |
| 3 | Filing of appeal with Ombudsman
If the complainant is not satisfied with the redressal of his grievances or if it has not been resolved by the intermediary or National Pension System Trust by the end of thirty days of the filing of the complaint, the complainant may file an appeal with the Ombudsman for redressal of the grievances of the complainant, within such period as has been specified for the purpose: |
Since the resolution of the grievances is to be carried by the concerned entities only, NPS Trust is not involved in the said resolution. NPS Trust is also not involved in the operational aspects of nodal offices or intermediaries, the option of raising grievance against NPS Trust may be done away with. | The reference to NPST has been omitted. |
| 4 | Jurisdiction of Ombudsman | The circumstances and situations warranting a conflict between the jurisdictions of Insurance Ombudsman appointed by IRDAI and since the insurer under has Insurance Ombudsman, the Ombudsman under PFRDA may be excluded for insurers through proper clarity in the proposed regulations. |
A grievance can be raised against an intermediary and the term intermediary has already been defined in the regulations. |
