Not upheld: General financial advice complaint against Openwork Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss P complained to the Financial Ombudsman Service about Openwork's handling of her Consumer Buy-to-Let mortgage application. After two mortgage applications were declined due to her property's location near commercial premises, Openwork said it could not help further. Miss P subsequently obtained a mortgage with another lender through a different broker and sought a refund of the £595 broker fee, claiming Openwork should have done more due diligence and should have informed her it was a restricted advice network. The ombudsman found that Openwork's fee agreement clearly stated the fee was non-refundable regardless of outcome, that Openwork had conducted substantial work, and that its status as a restricted advice network did not prevent it from recommending the lender Miss P ultimately used, as that lender had explicitly declined to lend on the property. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Openwork carried out substantial work for Miss P by searching the market and recommending two mortgages, even though both were declined. The fee agreement clearly stated the £595 fee was non-refundable regardless of outcome. While Openwork may not have adequately communicated its status as a restricted advice network, this did not prevent it from recommending lender A, which was the lender Miss P ultimately obtained a mortgage with. Openwork reasonably relied on lender A's explicit statement that it was unlikely to lend on Miss P's property, making it fair not to recommend that application. The ombudsman concluded that Miss P's property falling outside the criteria of two lenders was not caused by unfair treatment by Openwork.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website