Not upheld: Mis-selling / Misleading advertising regarding charging structure complaint against Trading 212 UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr Q complained that T212 induced him to open a CFD account through misleading advertising claiming '£0 commissions, £0 fees', when in fact the firm charged through spreads and overnight financing. He said he would not have opened the account had he understood the true charging structure, and sought compensation for losses including a defaulted loan he took out to fund trades. The ombudsman found that while the advert was ambiguous about which products it covered, T212's terms and policies clearly explained the charging mechanism, and Mr Q was in a position to make an informed decision. The ombudsman also noted that Mr Q discovered the true costs immediately upon first trading yet continued to trade over 1000 times profitably by end of 2019, demonstrating understanding of the platform. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman considered the complaint in the round, examining the entire customer journey from seeing the advert to opening the account and signing terms. While the advert may have been ambiguous about which products it covered, the ombudsman found that T212's terms, fee schedule, and order execution policy clearly explained the charging structure through spreads and overnight financing. The ombudsman noted that Mr Q quickly discovered the true nature of costs when he first traded, yet continued to trade extensively and profitably for a significant period, demonstrating he understood how the platform worked. Therefore, any subsequent losses could not fairly be attributed to initial reliance on misleading advertising.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website