Not upheld: General financial advice complaint against J M Finn & Co Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs B complained about JMF's management of an investment portfolio inherited from her late husband in 2009, raising concerns about fees, performance, tax treatment, and JMF's failure to provide appropriate support given her vulnerability due to age and health problems. JMF received notification in late 2018 that Mrs B had been hospitalized, and an LPA was registered in 2019, though JMF was not formally notified until September 2022. The ombudsman found that JMF managed the portfolio in line with the agreed discretionary mandate, conducted regular reviews, and acted on Mrs B's instructions appropriately. Although JMF could have been more proactive after learning of the hospitalization, the adviser's contemporaneous notes showed no concerns about Mrs B's capacity, and she appeared rational in communications. The ombudsman concluded JMF did not fail in its duty of care and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that JMF managed the portfolio in accordance with the agreed discretionary mandate, conducted regular reviews, and responded appropriately to Mrs B's changing objectives. While JMF received notification of Mrs B's hospitalization in late 2018, it was not provided with full details of her health problems or notification of the LPA until 2022. The adviser's contemporaneous notes did not indicate concerns about Mrs B's mental capacity, and she appeared rational in communications. Although JMF could have contacted Mrs B more promptly after the 2018 notification, it did so within weeks and continued to act on her instructions within the agreed mandate. The discretionary nature of the agreement meant JMF was authorized to make investment decisions on her behalf. No evidence supported that JMF failed in its duty of care or acted beyond the agreed mandate.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website