Not upheld: Unsuitable DB pension transfer advice and service quality complaint against Origen Financial Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms D complained to Origen Financial Services Limited about the abridged advice she received regarding a potential DB pension transfer. Origen recommended she retain her DB scheme, citing her insufficient secure income, the guaranteed income benefits at retirement age 62, and the irrevocable nature of transfers. Ms D was unhappy with this outcome and subsequently appointed new advisers who recommended transfer. She complained that Origen's report contained errors (including incorrectly stating she was in 'good' health despite documented health conditions), lacked sufficient detail about her health's importance to the advice, and that delays caused her transfer value to expire and market gains to be missed. The ombudsman found that Origen's advice was suitable and reasonable given Ms D's circumstances, that the firm properly considered her health and circumstances despite report errors, and that the £300 abridged advice fee was appropriately charged for the service provided.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the FCA principle that DB transfers will likely not be suitable for most customers and should only be recommended if clearly demonstrated to be in the client's best interests. While Ms D desired a transfer and had valid reasons (ill health, flexibility, inheritance), the ombudsman found insufficient evidence that Origen's advice to retain the scheme was unsuitable given Ms D's circumstances: she had insufficient secure income to cover essential expenditure, would benefit from the guaranteed income at age 62 when maintenance stopped, and could use existing investments and DC pensions for flexibility. Although the report contained errors (stating 'good' health when Ms D had documented health conditions), the wider documentation showed Origen was aware of and considered her health in their advice. The ombudsman noted that abridged advice by nature is less detailed than full advice, and the initial documentation clearly explained the service scope and fees. The fact that Ms D subsequently found an adviser recommending transfer does not mean Origen's advice was wrong.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website