Upheld: unsuitable advice and poor practice in investment switching complaint against Chase de Vere Independent Financial Advisers Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6021026 of 2026-04-13T00:00:00+00:00. unsuitable advice and poor practice in investment switching complaint against Chase de Vere Independent Financial Advisers Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6021026 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-13T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Chase de Vere Independent Financial Advisers Limited |
| Product | Investment |
| Claim type | unsuitable advice and poor practice in investment switching |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | CdV must pay Mrs T £250 for distress and inconvenience. Additionally, CdV must calculate Mrs T's financial loss using a specified formula: calculate the fair value the bond would have achieved had it remained invested (accounting for growth from encashment date to reinvestment date, with deductions for and subsequent addition of regular income payments not received), compare to actual value received, and pay the difference plus 8% simple interest from the encashment date until reinvestment date. Total payment must be made within 28 calendar days of Mrs T's acceptance of the decision, with additional 8% simple interest if payment is late. |
Summary
Mrs T complained that CdV advised her to encash a bond in July 2024 to reinvest in a Discounted Gift Scheme, but her DGS application was declined in March 2025 and her money remained uninvested for approximately eight months without income or growth. CdV argued it was not responsible for third-party delays and that Mrs T had not disclosed all her medical history. The Ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that CdV should have foreseen that further medical underwriting would be required based on Mrs T's age and disclosed medical information, and therefore should not have recommended encashing the bond before DGS eligibility was confirmed. The Ombudsman ordered CdV to pay £250 for distress and inconvenience, plus compensation for the financial loss calculated using a specified formula accounting for lost investment growth and income.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The Ombudsman applied FCA guidance that businesses must avoid causing foreseeable harm to retail customers and must carry out business with due skill, care and diligence. Given Mrs T's age, disclosed medical history, and the nature of the DGS product (which requires medical underwriting), CdV should have reasonably foreseen that further underwriting would be necessary and would take time. Therefore, it was unsuitable advice to recommend encashing the bond before DGS eligibility was confirmed. The firm could have prevented the financial loss by advising Mrs T to wait for a decision on the DGS before moving her money, allowing her to continue receiving income from the bond during the underwriting process.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Chase de Vere Independent Financial Advisers Limited, all decisions | 109 | 56% |
| Investment, all decisions | 13,970 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website