Not upheld: Pension transfer advice complaint against FIL Investments International
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5877496 of 2025-10-16T00:00:00+00:00. Pension transfer advice complaint against FIL Investments International. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5877496 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2025-10-16T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | FIL Investments International |
| Product | Pension |
| Claim type | Pension transfer advice |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | FIL to pay Mrs D £200 total compensation for distress and inconvenience (£100 already paid plus additional £100). FIL to recalculate interest on the 5-day delay in paying tax-free cash using 8% simple interest instead of 6.75% actually paid, and bring the difference up to date with 8% simple interest to date of settlement. |
Summary
Mrs D complained that FIL Investments International caused delays in her pension transfer to purchase an annuity, resulting in her missing a guaranteed annuity quotation that expired 25 November 2023 and ultimately receiving an annuity worth approximately £175 per month less for life (estimated £50,000 lifetime loss). The ombudsman found FIL was not responsible for missing the original guarantee deadline as it did not receive correct transfer instructions until 28 November 2023. While acknowledging FIL could have acted more efficiently and made a minor error in querying tax-free cash entitlement on 30 November, the ombudsman held that the primary responsibility lay with the IFA and Scottish Widows for failing to establish clear extension parameters and for not requesting a new guaranteed quote when the original expired. The complaint was not upheld, though FIL was ordered to pay £200 compensation and recalculate interest at 8% simple interest for the 5-day delay in paying tax-free cash.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found FIL was not responsible for the initial missed guaranteed quote as it did not receive correct instructions until after the deadline expired. While FIL could have acted more efficiently post-deadline, the ombudsman held that the primary responsibility for the loss lay with the IFA and Scottish Widows for failing to agree specific extension parameters and for not requesting a new guaranteed quote when the original expired. Had a new quote been requested, the evidence suggests Mrs D would have secured a better rate than ultimately received. FIL's delays, while not meeting industry standards, did not directly cause the annuity loss as this was determined by factors outside FIL's control. The ombudsman acknowledged FIL's minor error in querying tax-free cash entitlement on 30 November when this had already been established, causing a 5-day delay.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| FIL Investments International, all decisions | 7 | 14% |
| Pension transfer advice, all decisions | 7,542 | 54% |
| Pension, all decisions | 15,409 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website