A widow is seeking clarity over the calculation of her late husband's Eskom pension death benefit after the amount initially approved at more than R5m was subsequently recalculated to about R4.7m.

The Financial Services Tribunal has now set aside a decision by the Pension Funds Adjudicator that had dismissed L Crawford's complaint over the quantum of the death benefit payable to her following the death of her husband, I Crawford, reports IoL.

The late husband was a deferred pensioner of the Eskom Pension and Provident Fund. The fund initially calculated the death benefit at R5m including investment returns from the time Crawford became a deferred member until his death.

The board confirmed the amount on 19 April 2023, and Crawford was informed the benefit would be subject to tax deductions.

However, the fund later discovered that interest had incorrectly been added beyond Crawford's date of death. It recalculated the investment value at over R4.8m while an actuarial calculation placed the benefit at R4.7m.

The final benefit paid to Crawford was R4.7m.

The fund said the difference between the recalculated amount and the actuarial figure resulted from interest being added for April 2022, despite Crawford having died on 1 April.

The widow received R3.2m in December 2024, and over R369 000 in October 2025. The amounts represented the balance after tax deductions.

Crawford challenged the revised calculation, raising concerns about the lack of complete documentation and transparency surrounding the recalculation.

She pointed to three different figures provided during the process: R4.835m, R4.787m and R4.782m. She also disputed the evidentiary value of an Excel spreadsheet supplied by the fund in relation to the missing financial records, reports IoL.

The fund told the tribunal the missing benefit statements could not be retrieved from its system. It maintained fund rules permitted an actuary's estimate to form the basis for calculating pension benefits.

The tribunal found the fund had communicated the board-approved lump sum of R5m before the amount was subsequently corrected twice. It also found that the various calculations had been made without the benefit statements for the five outstanding years.

Although a spreadsheet relating to the missing financial information was later provided to Crawford, the spreadsheet was not included in the record before the tribunal.

The tribunal said these circumstances meant that the accuracy and substantiation of the recalculations were in doubt.

The tribunal found the adjudicator's decision did not engage with the quantification process.

The tribunal said the fund should explain how the spreadsheet was formulated and demonstrate how the authenticity and accuracy of the information relied upon had been established.

It found that Crawford's complaint about the assessment process was warranted.

The tribunal ultimately upheld her application for reconsideration.

Full IoL report