Financial Ombudsman Service  

Adviser to pay out after fraudster raids client’s pension

He said both parties had acted in good faith throughout the episode and had acknowledged that with hindsight, there were things they would have done differently.

However, the Fos placed the onus of the events on Charterhouse, explaining that the regulator’s handbook requires firms to conduct their business in line with the ‘eleven principles’.

Such principles obligate firms to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence, take reasonable care to organise and control affairs with adequate risk management systems and pay due regard to the interests of customers.

The Fos ruled Charterhouse had not acted in line with these principles.

The service also looked at Charterhouse’s typical process on withdrawals from pension funds and said such steps were not followed in Mrs G’s case.

Mr Williamson said: “Had Charterhouse deployed systems and an approach that was more effective I don’t think the fraudulent transfer would’ve been made to Mrs G’s bank account. 

“So, it’s responsible for giving effect to the fraudulent movement of funds from her pension pot into her bank account. It’s in breach of the Principles [from the FCA]."

What do you think about the issues raised by this story? Email us on to let us know