Not upheld: account management, debit balance recovery, set-off from ISA, poor communication complaint against IG Trading and Investments Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6263400 of 2026-05-12T00:00:00+00:00. account management, debit balance recovery, set-off from ISA, poor communication complaint against IG Trading and Investments Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6263400 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-12T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | IG Trading and Investments Limited |
| Product | share dealing account and stocks and shares ISA |
| Claim type | account management, debit balance recovery, set-off from ISA, poor communication |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | IG Trading and Investments Limited must pay Mr K £500 for distress and inconvenience caused by poor communication, if not already paid. IG is not required to refund the £1,153.46 debit balance or return the funds transferred from the ISA. |
Summary
Mr K complained that IG wrongly applied a debit balance of £1,153.46 to his share dealing account and recovered it by exercising set-off against his ISA funds. The debit arose from a platform issue that displayed inaccurate GBP balances when underlying holdings were in USD. IG's initial explanations were confusing and lacked clarity, causing Mr K distress and suspicion about the legitimacy of the demand. The ombudsman found the £1,153.46 shortfall was genuine and substantiated by account statements and FX calculations, and that IG's contractual terms permitted the set-off. However, the ombudsman found IG's communication fell below regulatory standards and upheld IG's offer of £500 compensation as fair redress, while declining to require refund of the underlying shortfall.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while IG's communication fell below expected standards and caused avoidable distress, the underlying £1,153.46 debit balance was genuine and substantiated by the account statements and FX calculations. Although the situation arose from IG's platform error, Mr K had transferred or benefited from funds not supported by the true underlying currency position. The ombudsman concluded that fair treatment under FCA Principle 6 required IG to compensate for poor communication but not to absorb the shortfall. The set-off from the ISA, while lacking transparency, fell within IG's contractual terms and was not prohibited under ISA rules.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| IG Trading and Investments Limited, all decisions | 13 | 38% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website