In a covering letter to the report under a section headed “advice charge” it stated: “Our fee for the recommendations made in this report will be calculated in accordance with our Specific Service Appendix dated 4 December 2016 ie, a fixed cost of £4,750.”
However in the report under the section “cost of advice” it stated: “We previously agreed a fixed fee of £4,750 plus /VAT (£5,700) to provide our advice to you on this matter.”
Mr Mansell disagreed with the adjudicator that a full refund should be awarded as Mazars Financial Planning had already carried out advice work and it was made clear that Mr M would have to pay some sort of advice fee.
With regards to the Sipp fees charged by Mazars Financial Planning he said that it was down to the firm to set its fee structure and this was not something that the Fos would usually interfere with.
However, he accepted that there were flaws in the way the advice charge was presented.
Therefore, Mr Mansell decided that Mazars Financial Planning should pay £1,200 as a partial refund.
What do you think about the issues raised by this story? Email us on email@example.com to let us know.