Does an offer to buy back into a pension scheme constitute a representation that they will not rely on the limitation period?

I find that the defendants’ offer to permit the plaintiffs to buy back into the pension scheme does not amount to a representation that they will not rely on the limitation period. Further, the plaintiffs failed to plead estoppel. As was said in Kimtra Holdings v. Ziva Holdings Ltd., [1986] B.C.J. No. 1575: If there is anything that is clear in practice it is that an estoppel must be pleaded with particularity. There is not one word in the pleadings by name or by material fact of this alleged election or affirmation and I decline to entertain any argument based upon it. Laches