Not upheld: irresponsible pension transfer and inadequate warnings complaint against Aviva Life & Pensions UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that Aviva failed in their responsibilities when he transferred his personal pension to a SSAS with Cantwell Grove in 2014, which was subsequently invested in a high-risk hotel development in Cape Verde that lost all value. Mr B argued Aviva should have provided greater warnings about the transfer risks and undertaken more due diligence. Aviva had initially refused the transfer in 2013 due to Pension Liberation concerns but agreed in June 2014 after those concerns were resolved, providing detailed warnings about cold calling from unregulated introducers, SSAS complexity and costs, lack of FSCS protection, and specific risks of Cape Verde property investment. The ombudsman found Aviva undertook appropriate due diligence in line with Scorpion guidance and regulatory requirements, and provided specific, reasonable warnings that were fair in the circumstances, so the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Aviva undertook appropriate due diligence on the transfer in line with the Scorpion guidance and regulatory requirements. Aviva's initial concerns about Pension Liberation were legitimately resolved when Mr B confirmed he understood the risks and was not intending early access. After undertaking due diligence, Aviva provided specific, reasonable warnings about cold calling from unregulated introducers, the complexity and costs of establishing a SSAS, the risks of unprotected overseas property investments in Cape Verde, and the lack of FSCS protection. While Aviva could have asked Mr B specifically who advised him, they clearly understood the possibility of cold calling and warned against relying on unregulated introducers. The warnings were specific to Mr B's circumstances and gave him the tools to check whether his adviser was regulated. Overall, Aviva's actions were fair and reasonable and did not breach their regulatory responsibilities.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website