Not upheld: Pension transfer advice complaint against St James's Place Wealth Management Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs H complained that St James's Place Wealth Management Plc provided unsuitable advice to transfer her late husband's pension into an SJP Retirement Account and failed to properly explain the Early Withdrawal Charge, which she incurred when transferring the plan away in December 2025. At the time of the advice in April 2024, Mrs H was aged 55, recently bereaved, and appeared to have sufficient financial resources including an expected £400,000 Death in Service payment, rental income from three properties, and savings. The adviser recommended a balanced investment strategy with a five-year investment horizon, which Mrs H indicated she would not need to access before that time. The ombudsman found the advice was suitable based on the information available at the time and that the Early Withdrawal Charge was clearly disclosed in the suitability letter, illustration, and Terms and Conditions documents provided to Mrs H. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the advice was suitable based on Mrs H's circumstances as known at the time of the recommendation. Mrs H had indicated she would not need to access the pension for approximately five years, by which time the Early Withdrawal Charge would have been substantially reduced or eliminated. The Early Withdrawal Charge was clearly disclosed in multiple documents provided to Mrs H in writing, including the suitability letter, illustration, and Terms and Conditions. The adviser was entitled to rely on Mrs H's representations about her financial position, including the expected Death in Service payment and rental income, as there was no reason to doubt this information at the time. The subsequent non-receipt of the full Death in Service payment and failure of the buy-to-let properties to generate income were circumstances that arose after the advice was given and could not be held against the adviser.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website