Partially upheld: unsuitable investment advice and failure to provide ongoing service complaint against Openwork Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6353594 of 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00. unsuitable investment advice and failure to provide ongoing service complaint against Openwork Limited. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6353594 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Openwork Limited |
| Product | pension, stocks and shares ISA, general investment account, investment bond, inheritance tax service |
| Claim type | unsuitable investment advice and failure to provide ongoing service |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | 1. Refund service charges of £5,905.65 with interest at 8% gross simple from date charges were taken to settlement date. 2. Pay £1,000 for distress and inconvenience. 3. For Octopus ITS unsuitable advice: compare actual investment value against benchmark (50% FTSE UK Private Investors Income Total Return Index, 50% average fixed rate bond returns) from investment date to final decision date. If fair value exceeds actual value, pay difference plus 8% simple interest per year from final decision to settlement if not settled within 28 days. If investment is illiquid and cannot be sold, assign nil value and obtain undertaking from Mr A to account for any future proceeds. |
Summary
Mr A complained that Openwork provided unsuitable investment advice and failed to provide ongoing service. Between 2015 and 2021, Openwork recommended investments including a £45,000 Octopus ITS in 2021 for IHT mitigation. In 2023, Mr A's adviser retired and was replaced by Ms S, with whom Mr A had no contact thereafter, though Openwork continued charging fees. The ombudsman upheld the complaint regarding the Octopus ITS as unsuitable given Mr A's cautious risk profile and lack of justification for the two-year IHT timeframe, but rejected the claim for lost ISA allowance compensation as Mr A was only entitled to the Premier service which did not include mandatory annual reviews. Openwork must refund service charges with interest, pay £1,000 for distress, and compensate for the unsuitable ITS investment using a 50/50 benchmark of fixed-rate bonds and equity index returns.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The Octopus ITS was unsuitable because it was too high-risk for Mr A's cautious risk profile and Openwork failed to adequately explore alternatives. The 2018 fact-find showed Mr A intended to gradually reduce IHT liability through gifts and spending, not through a shortened two-year timeframe requiring a high-risk investment. Potentially exempt transfers (PETs) or the Prudential bond approach would have been more suitable. The claim that Mr A needed to retain capital access was not adequately evidenced, and even if true, the ITS shares were not easily liquid. Regarding the ISA allowance, Mr A was only entitled to the Premier service which provided access to adviser for portfolio review but not mandatory annual reviews of suitability - this was part of Premier Plus. Therefore, Openwork was not obliged to proactively contact Mr A about ISA contributions.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Openwork Limited, all decisions | 334 | 30% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website