Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against 2 Plan Wealth Management Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6099440 of 2026-01-23T00:00:00+00:00. Service failures generally complaint against 2 Plan Wealth Management Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6099440 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-01-23T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | 2 Plan Wealth Management Limited |
| Product | Pension |
| Claim type | Service failures generally |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | 1. 2Plan must calculate the notional value of Mrs X's SIPP as at the date of final decision, assuming a £50,000 net member contribution on 28 October 2024 invested in the same holdings and proportions as the £42,450 actually invested, excluding the actual £42,450 contribution from the calculation. 2. Obtain the actual current value of Mrs X's SIPP as at the date of final decision. 3. Deduct actual value from notional value to determine pension loss. 4. If SIPP operator cannot provide notional valuation, calculate loss using FTSE UK Private Investors Income Total Return Index from 28 October 2024 to final decision date, with allowance for the £42,450 actual contribution. 5. Pay compensation into Mrs X's pension arrangement to increase transfer value by the calculated loss amount, accounting for tax relief and charges. If pension payment not possible, pay direct to Mrs X reduced by 20% for notional income tax (or 15% if 25% tax-free lump sum available). 6. Add 8% simple interest per annum from final decision date to settlement date if not paid within 28 days. 7. Pay £500 for distress and inconvenience. 8. Provide clear redress calculation details to Mrs X. |
Summary
Mrs X and Mr X received pension advice from 2Plan and were recommended to make £50,000 contributions each to their SIPPs. 2Plan sent confidential information including bank details, amounts, and SIPP reference numbers via unsecure non-portal emails and Adobe Acrobat Sign (without encryption). A scammer who had compromised Mrs X's work email address used this information to create a convincing fraudulent email with altered bank details. Mrs X transferred £100,000 to the scammer's account but recovered £84,900 through her bank's APP scheme, leaving a £15,100 loss. 2Plan refused to compensate the loss, arguing it was not responsible for Mrs X's compromised email. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that 2Plan breached its own data protection policy and regulatory obligations by failing to use secure methods for transmitting confidential fund transfer information, thereby enabling the foreseeable fraud. 2Plan must compensate Mrs X for her pension loss plus £500 for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
As a regulated firm, 2Plan had obligations under PRIN 2.1.1R and COBS 2.1.1R to conduct business with due skill, care and diligence and act in customers' best interests. Under SYSC 3.2.6R, 2Plan must take reasonable care to establish effective systems and controls for countering financial crime. 2Plan's own data protection policy explicitly prohibited sending confidential financial information (bank details, amounts, reference numbers) via unsecure email for fund transfers, recognising this as a high-risk area for fraud. The adviser breached this policy by: (1) using unsecure non-portal emails for suitability letters and SIPP reference numbers; (2) sending the Firm Y Contribution Form via Adobe without encryption or password protection; (3) failing to use available alternatives (in-person signing or post). Although the Firm Y form is publicly available online, the combination of the form with amounts and reference numbers sent insecurely constituted confidential information. The scammer used all this information to create a convincing fraudulent email. Mrs X acted reasonably: she was not required to give 'tacit consent' to insecure practices; she could not have known her email was compromised; the scam was highly sophisticated; her query about changed bank details was reasonable though unfortunately sent to the scammer's fake email; and bank fraud prompts were insufficient after receiving apparent reassurance from the adviser. Therefore, 2Plan is liable for Mrs X's loss.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| 2 Plan Wealth Management Limited, all decisions | 26 | 33% |
| Service failures generally, all decisions | 32,767 | 33% |
| Pension, all decisions | 15,579 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website