Not upheld: Investment mis-selling complaint against Philip J Milton & Company Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B, represented by a CMC, complained that his discretionarily managed ISA with Philip J Milton was unsuitable due to excessive risk exposure, and raised additional complaints about delays in selling the ISA, failure to close it promptly, and poor complaint handling. The ombudsman found the investment was a transfer from an existing PEP already at risk, was not high risk, and Mr B had demonstrated appetite for risk, making it suitable. Mr B had chosen a longer-term encashment option to avoid additional fees, making the sale timeline fair. While the firm's complaint response could have been more professional, there was insufficient evidence of distress caused to Mr B. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied a test of whether the firm did anything significantly wrong, rather than focusing solely on whether Mr B suffered a loss. On suitability, the investment was a transfer from an existing PEP already at risk, was not high risk, and Mr B had demonstrated some appetite for risk. The tax efficiency complaint was unfounded as the transfer was not subject to new ISA contribution limits and Mr B did not simultaneously make contributions and take income. Charges were percentage-based and not excessive for the service provided. On the sale, Mr B was presented with clear options and chose the longer-term encashment option to avoid additional fees, so the timeline was fair. The outstanding £75 was immaterial. On complaint handling, while the response could have been more professional, there was insufficient evidence Mr B suffered distress as the CMC handled correspondence on his behalf.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website