Upheld: General financial advice complaint against SJW Independent Financial Management Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6444787 of 2026-06-30T00:00:00+00:00. General financial advice complaint against SJW Independent Financial Management Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6444787 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-30T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | SJW Independent Financial Management Limited |
| Product | Investment |
| Claim type | General financial advice |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | SJW must refund all ongoing advice charges paid from August 2022 onwards, adjusted for growth using the FTSE Private Investors Income total return index. For non-pension investments, refund directly to Mrs J. For pension investments, refund into the pension plan if possible, or pay directly with a 20% reduction (or 15% if tax-free lump sum available) to account for notional income tax. Additionally, SJW must pay £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by failure to respond to complaint and lack of cooperation with FOS. |
Summary
Mrs J complained that SJW failed to provide ongoing annual reviews of her investments despite charging 0.5% ongoing advice fees as contracted. The last review occurred in August 2022, and Mrs J received no further contact or reviews for three years before complaining in May 2025. SJW failed to acknowledge the complaint or respond to multiple requests from the FOS for information. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding SJW breached its contractual obligations and ordered refund of all ongoing charges from August 2022 onwards with growth adjustment, plus £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by SJW's failure to respond.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Mrs J and SJW had a clear contractual agreement for annual reviews in return for ongoing advice charges. Mrs J provided credible evidence that no reviews occurred after August 2022, and SJW failed to provide any evidence to rebut this or demonstrate the service was provided. SJW's complete failure to respond to complaint correspondence and FOS requests further supported the finding that the service was not provided. Under the balance of probabilities, SJW failed to deliver the contracted service.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| SJW Independent Financial Management Limited, all decisions | 2 | 100% |
| General financial advice, all decisions | 4,854 | 36% |
| Investment, all decisions | 14,229 | 34% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website