Not upheld: Investment mis-selling complaint against M & G Securities Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that M&G used unit prices from different dates (21 November for the merging fund and 22 November for the receiving fund) when merging two investment funds, contrary to its stated policy. Investigation revealed M&G actually used 22 November 2024 unrounded prices for both funds, consistent with its merger communication. Although the merging fund's price decreased while the receiving fund's increased between 21-22 November, Mr B's total holding value remained unchanged. The Ombudsman found M&G acted fairly by using the effective merger date prices as stated in its policy, and rejected Mr B's speculation about asset encashment and his claim for compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

M&G used 22 November 2024 unit prices for both funds, which aligned with its stated policy and Mr B's own expectation. Although Mr B would have benefited financially if M&G had used 21 November prices, that was not M&G's policy. The fact that the two funds experienced different price movements between 21-22 November does not indicate wrongdoing, as the funds were not identical and similar past movements did not guarantee identical future movements. Mr B's total value was preserved through the merger.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website