Partially upheld: Complaints handling failures complaint against Hargreaves Lansdown Asset Management Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr P complained to HL about misinformation received during two telephone calls in June 2025 when seeking assistance with placing trades on US stock within his Stocks and Shares ISA. Mr P claimed the unclear advice about FOK orders and unavailable stop loss options led to a financial loss of approximately £13,800 when he sold his entire US stock holding on 27 June. HL partly upheld the complaint, acknowledging that adviser explanations could have been clearer, and offered £200 compensation. The Ombudsman found that while the misinformation was genuine, it did not cause the financial loss because FOK orders were clearly explained on the platform, Mr P had prior experience with such orders, and as an execution-only client he bore responsibility for his investment decisions. The complaint was partially upheld only regarding the six-month delay in HL's complaint response, which caused additional distress, with the £200 compensation deemed reasonable for this delay.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Ombudsman found that while HL advisers provided misinformation about FOK order timescales, this did not cause Mr P's financial loss because: (1) FOK orders were clearly explained on HL's website and platform before placement; (2) Mr P had previously used FOK orders and understood the process; (3) Mr P was an execution-only client responsible for his own investment decisions; (4) Mr P had to confirm multiple steps understanding what order he was placing; (5) the FOK order on 27 June executed exactly as designed - it attempted to sell at market open and cancelled when the price parameters could not be met. The Ombudsman upheld the complaint only regarding the delay in HL's complaint response (6 months), which caused additional distress to Mr P.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website