SIPP  

Adviser to pay out after client's Sipp filled with Ucis

Although Mr C may have thought the investment was a good idea at the time due to advertised returns, it is likely he didn't understand all the risks and did not have the capacity to lose a large proportion of his retirement, the ombudsman explained.

Walter said: “PFS shouldn’t have recommended Mr C to invest into WTEP as it was clearly not in his best interest.”

The ombudsman said Mr C should be compensated “as quickly as possible” and that it was down to the former partners to organise how to do this. 

Walter ordered the firm to put Mr C as close as possible into the position he would be in had he been given suitable advice.

The firm must also pay Mr C £250 for the trouble and upset caused.

amy.austin@ft.com

What do you think about the issues raised by this story? Email us on FTAletters@ft.com to let us know