Upheld: unsuitable advice, improper charging, service failures complaint against WPS Advisory Ltd
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6068993 of 2026-04-23T00:00:00+00:00. unsuitable advice, improper charging, service failures complaint against WPS Advisory Ltd. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6068993 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-23T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | WPS Advisory Ltd |
| Product | Pension |
| Claim type | unsuitable advice, improper charging, service failures |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | WPS must: (1) Calculate notional value of surplus TFC if it had remained invested in pension until 26 June 2024 and compare to actual value in savings account (accounting for interest earned and tax paid); pay compensation if pension investment would have been better; (2) Refund £750 advice fee and calculate loss by obtaining notional pension value as if fee had remained invested, compared to actual pension value at final decision date; (3) Pay £300 for distress and inconvenience; (4) Compensation to be paid into pension if possible with tax relief, or as lump sum to Mr C with notional 20% income tax reduction if pension payment not possible; (5) Interest at 8% per year simple from final decision date if not paid within 28 days of acceptance. |
Summary
Mr C complained to WPS Advisory Ltd about advice received in March 2024 to crystallise his SIPP pension and take his remaining tax-free cash entitlement. WPS based this advice on the speculative assumption that a Labour government would change Lifetime Allowance rules, presenting alarming figures and artificial urgency to pressure Mr C into immediate action. The general election had not even been announced at the time of the advice. Mr C accepted the advice, but WPS then failed to process the transaction promptly despite creating urgency about tax year deadlines, causing him significant distress. WPS also charged an unexpected £750 advice fee that was not clearly communicated. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding the advice unsuitable because it was based on uncertain future events, the fee should not have been charged, and service failures caused distress. WPS must compensate Mr C for investment losses on the surplus TFC held in savings, refund the £750 fee, and pay £300 for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found the advice unsuitable because WPS advised Mr C to take irreversible action (crystallising pension and taking all TFC) based on speculative assumptions about future LTA rule changes that had not been announced and were not certain to occur. Mr C was not worried about LTA changes until WPS raised the issue. The advice was presented with urgency and alarming figures (£55,000 potential tax bill) to pressure Mr C into immediate action. The £750 advice fee was not clearly communicated as an additional charge during initial discussions and should not have been charged for advice that was not needed. Service failures occurred when WPS failed to progress the matter despite creating artificial urgency about tax year deadlines, causing Mr C significant distress and requiring him to chase the firm multiple times.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| WPS Advisory Ltd, all decisions | 29 | 41% |
| Pension, all decisions | 15,409 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website