Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Charteris Treasury Portfolio Managers Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs W complained that Charteris Treasury Portfolio Managers Ltd continued to charge Annual Management Charges (AMC) after they removed its discretionary management permissions in April 2024, claiming no service was being provided. Charteris maintained it continued to provide administration, monitoring, and custodian coordination services and was entitled to continue charging fees. The Ombudsman found that although Mr and Mrs W had removed discretionary permissions, they had not terminated their relationship with Charteris and their investments remained with the firm for several months while they arranged alternative arrangements. Charteris continued to provide ongoing administration and monitoring services, making it reasonable to continue charging the agreed AMC. However, the Ombudsman found Charteris provided poor communication by suggesting an advisory service conversion without proper agreement and failing to clarify fee collection methods, warranting £100 compensation for confusion and frustration caused.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Ombudsman found that although Mr and Mrs W removed Charteris' discretionary permissions, they did not terminate their relationship with the firm. Their investments remained with Charteris for several months while they arranged to move to another adviser. During this period, Charteris continued to provide administration and monitoring services, including account monitoring, corporate action notifications, and custodian services coordination. The removal of discretionary permissions did not eliminate the need for these services; it merely added administrative steps requiring client permission for changes. Therefore, it was reasonable for Charteris to continue charging the agreed AMC. However, Charteris provided poor communication by suggesting the service had converted to advisory without proper agreement, and failed to clarify whether it could sell assets to cover fees, causing confusion and frustration.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website