Upheld: General financial advice complaint against SJW Independent Financial Management Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6444817 of 2026-06-30T00:00:00+00:00. General financial advice complaint against SJW Independent Financial Management Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6444817 |
|---|---|
| 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 the anniversary of payment in 2022 to date, adjusted for growth using the FTSE Private Investors Income total return index. For non-pension investments, refund directly to Mr J. For pension investments, pay into the pension plan if possible (allowing for charges and tax relief), or if not possible, pay directly to Mr J with a 20% reduction (or 15% if tax-free lump sum available) to account for notional income tax at basic rate. Additionally, SJW must pay £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by failure to respond to complaint and failure to cooperate with FOS. |
Summary
Mr J entered into a financial advisory agreement with SJW in July 2018 that included annual investment reviews in return for 0.5% ongoing advice charges. The last review occurred in August 2022, after which Mr J received no further reviews or adviser contact for three years. When Mrs J complained on Mr J's behalf in May 2025 requesting a refund of charges for services not provided, SJW failed to acknowledge or respond to the complaint. SJW similarly failed to respond to multiple FOS requests for information and documentation. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding SJW breached its contractual obligations and ordered refund of all ongoing charges from August 2022 onwards with growth, plus £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by the firm's failure to respond.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
SJW failed to provide evidence of any investment reviews after August 2022 despite being contractually obligated to conduct annual reviews in return for ongoing advice charges. SJW's complete failure to respond to complaint correspondence and multiple FOS requests for information, combined with the absence of any rebuttal evidence, means on the balance of probabilities that SJW failed to provide the agreed service. The firm's non-cooperation with the FOS also justifies an award for distress and inconvenience.
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