Bonds Decision Reference 2022-0018

• Case Outcome: Rejected
• Reference: 2022-0018
• Date: 10 January 2022
• Year: 2022
• Subject Matter: Bonds
• Conducts Complained Of: Mis-selling (investment),Delayed or inadequate communication, Dissatisfaction with final fund value
• Finantial Sector: Investment

Decision Ref:

2022-0018

Sector:

Investment

Product / Service:

Bonds

Conduct(s) complained of:

Mis-selling (investment)

Delayed or inadequate communication

Dissatisfaction with final fund value

Outcome:

Rejected

LEGALLY BINDING DECISION OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN

This complaint relates to an investment product and the suggested overcharging,

maladministration and inadequate complaints handling by the Provider.

The Complainants’ Case

The Complainants submit that in May 2016 they invested in an investment bond product,

offered by the Provider. In their complaint form to this office, the Complainants confirm that

the product itself was sold to them by another financial service provider, not by the Provider.

The complaint concerns an investment period between May 2016 and June 2018. The

Complainants say that during this period, their investment bond was invested in a [Type

Redacted] Fund. The Complainants assert that the fund is rated by the Provider at the lowest

end of its risk indicators, with the stated aim being to preserve capital. They assert that the

fundamental aim of the fund to preserve capital was not achieved by the Provider and the

Complainants’ bond decreased in value over this period net of exit tax, by approximately

4%.

The Complainants state that the Provider applied a management charge of 1% which they

submit is excessive for a fund of this nature which requires a lower level of management,

compared to an actively managed fund consisting of a portfolio of shares, property, bonds

and other investment.