SIPPMay 24 2021

Quilter to pay out after former Caerus AR leaves client's Sipp in cash

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Quilter to pay out after former Caerus AR leaves client's Sipp in cash

The Financial Ombudsman Service found J & P Financial Services should have advised its client to invest his regular Sipp contributions in order to grow his funds.

As the firm was an appointed representative of Caerus at the time the advice was given in 2015, the Fos has now ordered Quilter to pay the client compensation. Quilter bought Caerus in 2017.

The issue first arose when the client, who the Fos called Mr L, was advised to set up a Sipp to accommodate the transfer of a personal pension, which was then used to purchase part of a commercial property to be used by Mr L’s business. 

The commercial property was owned by Mr L, his business partner and Mr L’s brother.

But in 2015, Mr L and his business partner wanted to buy his brother’s share of the property – so Mr L agreed to make regular contributions to his Sipp to buy the remaining part of the property.

J & P Financial recommended that Mr L paid £500 each month into the Sipp and it was agreed that his attitude to risk was “moderate” and 1 per cent would be taken for ongoing advice fees.

However Mr L didn’t have a review after 2016 and by 2018 he realised his contributions to the Sipp were being held in cash.

He complained that he was led to believe his money would be invested and he wouldn’t have made further contributions if he had known they would remain in cash.

J & P Financial said it believed Mr L’s intention was to leave the funds in cash due to the impending property purchase.

However, it admitted that it had not conducted annual reviews despite Mr L still paying a fee.

The firm offered Mr L a total of £1,750 as a refund for the advice fees it had taken, which included £250 for the distress and inconvenienced caused by “administrative oversights”.

But Mr L brought his complaint to the Fos.

Ombudsman findings

Ombudsman Keith Lawrence found there was no evidence to suggest that investment advice was given in respect of the rental income or the regular contributions and that Mr L was recommended that the contributions should be held in cash.

But in order to buy the share of the property Mr L and his business partner would have needed around £60,000. 

It would therefore have taken them around five years to save that level of capital based on the regular contributions they agreed to make.  

The Fos said that J & P Financial would have known this and should have recommended that Mr L invested his contributions in line with his attitude to risk.  

Lawrence then said that J & P Financial’s ongoing service would have allowed it, and Mr L, to reduce any investment risk if it was needed.

Lawrence said: “I think Mr L had been made aware that his contributions would be held in cash, but I don’t that was suitable advice. 

“Because of the length of time it would have taken to build up the capital required to achieve Mr L’s objective of buying the rest of the commercial premises, I think he should have been advised to ‘invest’ the contributions – and rental income, in line with his attitude to risk.”

The firm didn’t accept the decision at first saying that Lawrence had accepted a “hindsight approach” and that Mr L was only ever interested in keeping the funds in cash to ensure there was no loss to the pension fund when it came to buying out the commercial premises.

But then the firm told the Fos that it hadn’t been a separate regulated entity at the time of the advice and had actually been an appointed representative of Caerus until November 2015.

So it said the complaint should be considered against new Caerus owner Quilter instead.

Quilter accepted responsibility for the advice and agreed to pay out.

The Fos said Mr L should be put as closely as possible into the position he would probably now be in if he had been given suitable advice.

Quilter must also pay £250 for the disruption caused to Mr L’s retirement planning.

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