The question asks about the actions available to the trustees, given the covenant assessment is weak. The solution seems to ignore some obvious items. For example (just writing the pointers): Restriction on the use of free cash flow with the sponsor. Alternative to cash payment - Ratchets Altering members Is there any specific circumstance wherein these items fit? Because imo, these can be tailored according to the demands of the question. Looking forward to the expert opinion here. Thanks
Hi I think the Examiners Report (and the solution in ASET) focuses on higher level actions or issues, eg the need to review the investment and funding strategies. When considering the funding strategy, it appears the examiners gave credit for suitable examples of specific actions - they used additional contributions and contingent assets / contributions, but I would expect any suitable example to have gained credit. Similarly it appears that there was credit available for suggesting that the scheme design could be amended. So I think items along the lines that you suggest may have gained some credit, especially if presented as examples within a framework of high-level actions. I hope that helps.
Thank you for your response. To conclude, I understand that the scoring opportunity is higher as long as we are able to tailor it.
