Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Janus Henderson Fund Management UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

The estate of Mrs R, represented by executor Mr R, complained about Janus Henderson's service when settling Mrs R's account following her death. Mr R experienced difficulties with identity verification, discrepancies between his driving licence address and actual address, and poor contact experiences including long wait times and speaking to different representatives. While Janus acknowledged a mistake in sending an unnecessary letter after resolving the matter and paid £100 compensation, the ombudsman found that Janus had taken necessary regulatory steps and did not act unfairly. The ombudsman determined that as executor, Mr R could not be personally compensated for distress and inconvenience, and no loss to the estate was identified, therefore not upholding the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Janus took necessary steps to meet its regulatory obligations and protect the estate's money. The 10-working-day delay before the initial call was standard procedure to allow time for receipt of death certificates or probate. While acknowledging Mr R's frustrations with contact difficulties and a mistake in Janus's complaint handling (already compensated with £100), the ombudsman determined that Janus did not act unfairly or make material errors in the verification process. Crucially, the ombudsman held that as executor, Mr R was representing the estate and therefore could not be personally compensated for distress and inconvenience under FOS jurisdiction rules—only the estate could claim for losses incurred to it, and no such loss was identified.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website