Upheld: Complaints handling failures complaint against M & G Securities Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H complained that M&G set up a direct debit on his bank account after his investment account with M&G had been closed, causing him distress and inconvenience. On 14 November 2024, Mr H's bank notified him of a new direct debit setup by M&G, which Mr H claimed had occurred twice before. M&G denied setting up any direct debits and claimed the bank must have made an error, but Mr H's bank provided evidence that M&G had initiated the direct debit via AUDDIS. The ombudsman could not definitively prove M&G set up the direct debit based on available evidence, but upheld the complaint because M&G's communication was poor and unhelpful, focusing on post-cancellation events rather than addressing Mr H's legitimate concern about the initial direct debit notification. M&G was ordered to pay £250 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its inadequate handling.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While the ombudsman could not definitively establish on the balance of probabilities that M&G set up the direct debit (due to lack of evidence in M&G's records), the complaint was upheld based on M&G's poor handling and communication. M&G's explanations focused on post-cancellation events rather than addressing Mr H's legitimate concern about why the direct debit notification appeared in the first place. This unhelpful communication caused Mr H distress and inconvenience and frustrated his attempts to resolve his concerns. The ombudsman found that further investigation would be unlikely to produce conclusive evidence and therefore upheld the complaint on the basis of M&G's communication failures rather than the underlying cause of the direct debit appearance.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website