Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against J M Finn & Co Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

The executors of Mrs C's estate complained that JM Finn & Co Ltd should have transferred an investment account to trustees' names after her death or taken instructions from trustees to liquidate assets. JM Finn required a Grant of Probate before acting, causing delays from June 2015 to January 2016 and resulting in investment losses. The executors argued the account was a trust holding and trustees had authority to instruct liquidation. The ombudsman found that the trust deed established Mrs C held the investment in personal capacity subject to trust obligations, not as a trustee, meaning her personal representatives required Grant of Probate to give instructions. JM Finn's position was legally correct and delays resulted from difficulties in obtaining probate and personal representative participation, not from firm error. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found the crucial issue was whether the account was a personal account of Mrs C or a trust holding. The trust deed itself distinguished Mrs C from the trustees and stated she held assets in personal capacity. The fact that beneficial owners were trustees and the trust held rights over the investment did not make it a trust account. Mrs C was not a trustee but a personal account holder subject to trust obligations. Therefore, JM Finn correctly required Grant of Probate and personal representative instructions. The subsequent delays flowed from difficulties in obtaining probate and personal representative participation, for which JM Finn was not responsible.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website