Not upheld: Investment mis-selling complaint against NFU Mutual Select Investments Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs G complained on behalf of her late father's estate that NFU Mutual Select Investments Limited failed to inform her that the value of his Stocks and Shares ISA could fluctuate, and that she would have withdrawn the money had she known this. She also complained about not being told about policy amalgamation, delayed provision of platform charge information, incorrect advice about probate requirements, and lack of opportunity to discuss the ISA. The ombudsman found that while NFU could have been more helpful given Mrs G's circumstances of dealing with her father's death and mother's terminal illness, it did not act wrongly as a non-advisory platform. The terms and conditions made clear investments would remain active until instructed otherwise, and NFU was not required to provide investment advice. The other failings caused no financial loss, making the £200 offer reasonable.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman distinguished between failing to be helpful and failing to do something wrong. While acknowledging NFU could have been more proactive and compassionate given Mrs G's circumstances, the ombudsman found that NFU was not required to provide investment advice as it was not a paid advisor. The terms and conditions made clear that money would remain invested until instructed otherwise. The failures regarding amalgamation notification and delayed charge information, while disappointing, resulted in no financial loss. Therefore, the £200 offer was reasonable compensation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website