On the go: Chief executive Lesley Titcomb will be leaving the Pensions Regulator at the end of her four-year contract in February 2019.
Ahead of her departure, Titcomb and the executive team will continue to drive forward with the programme of change she has been leading, in accordance with the pensions watchdog’s “clearer, quicker and tougher” stance.
The regulator highlighted that, in the three years since Titcomb became chief executive, achievements have included securing £363m for members of the BHS pension schemes and £329m for Coats members.
It has also helped more than 9.6m more people start saving for their retirement with more than one million employers complying with their auto-enrolment duties.
Mark Boyle, chairman of the board of the regulator, expressed his appreciation for the “superb job” Titcomb is continuing to do as chief executive.
“She has been a real catalyst for change, working with energy and drive to get results and make a difference to the way we work,” he said.
Titcomb said: “This has been a difficult personal decision taken after extensive discussion with family and the chairman.”
She said she loves “working at TPR and am immensely proud of what we are achieving. But as I turn 57 next month, the end of my contract in February 2019 feels like the appropriate moment to find more time in my life for family, friends, other interests and opportunities”.
Titcomb added that, in the nine months before her departure, there is still a lot more to do, and “I will be here leading that work with my strong, committed TPR team”.
The watchdog's announcement comes following a letter from MPs earlier this month, asking chairman of the board of the regulator Mark Boyle for more information on how it would be evaluating the performance of Titcomb.
The Work and Pensions Committee and the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee wrote in a letter that, “while there is a desperate need for the regulator to be quicker, bolder and more proactive, this will require substantial cultural change in an organisation where a tentative and apologetic approach is ingrained”.
The letter had added that the committees “are far from convinced that TPR’s current leadership is equipped to effect that change”.
