Partially upheld: unauthorized transaction / operational error in share sale complaint against Solium Capital UK Limited (trading as Morgan Stanley at Work)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H held shares in his employer's company through a tax-favoured employee share scheme managed by Solium. Following his retirement in 2024, his shares were transferred to a Vested Share Account. In April 2025, Solium sold Mr H's shares in error without his authorization and paid him approximately £12,600 in proceeds. Solium apologized and offered to reinstate the account if Mr H returned the proceeds by 30 May 2025, but Mr H initially believed the email was a scam and did not cooperate. By the time Mr H realized the offer was genuine, he had not returned the proceeds, and the share price had increased, meaning the proceeds were insufficient to repurchase all shares. Mr H claimed additional tax liabilities and loss of employee share scheme benefits. The ombudsman upheld the complaint that the shares were wrongfully sold but found Solium's offer of £550 compensation fair and reasonable, as Mr H had failed to cooperate with the reinstatement offer and provided no evidence of losses beyond what Solium had offered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While Solium was clearly at fault in selling the shares without authorization, the ombudsman found that Solium had offered a reasonable remedy by requesting return of proceeds to reinstate the account. Mr H's failure to cooperate with this offer, despite realizing it was not a scam, meant he lost the opportunity to have his account reinstated at the original share price. The ombudsman found no evidence that Mr H had suffered additional tax liabilities beyond the £388.34 offered by Solium for potential CGT, and no clear evidence that loss of employee share scheme benefits was caused by the April 2025 sale rather than Mr H's retirement in 2024. The distress and inconvenience, while understandable, was partly attributable to Mr H's failure to cooperate in putting things right. Therefore, Solium's offer of £550 was deemed fair and reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website