Not upheld: Pension transfer advice complaint against Grove Pension Solutions Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that Grove Pension Solutions negligently advised him to transfer his Option 32 pension in 2013, causing him to forfeit a valuable Guaranteed Minimum Pension of £435 per month. Grove had actually recommended against the transfer in clear terms, explaining Mr B would lose approximately £28,400 in pension income if he lived to age 84. Mr B responded that after careful thought he wanted to proceed despite the risks to clear his debts and 'move on' with his life. The ombudsman found Grove had satisfied its regulatory obligations by providing clear information, considering alternatives, and adequately documenting Mr B's understanding and insistence on proceeding against advice. The complaint was not upheld as Grove acted fairly and reasonably in the circumstances.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Grove satisfied its regulatory obligations by: (1) collecting information about Mr B's financial situation, knowledge, experience and objectives; (2) considering alternative ways to achieve his objectives; (3) setting out risks in clear language; (4) providing a detailed comparison of benefits showing what he would lose; and (5) making clear it did not recommend the transfer. Mr B was given sufficient time to consider the recommendation, responded that he had given 'a lot of thought' to the risks, and explicitly stated he wanted to proceed despite the advice. The ombudsman found Grove acted fairly and reasonably in facilitating the transfer when Mr B insisted, as there was no rule preventing this and Grove had adequately satisfied itself that Mr B understood the risks and was acting against its advice.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website