Ruling against firm which sparked Sipp claims fears to be reviewed

A ruling against a Sipp operator which sparked fears of a precedent being set and a rise in claims will be reviewed by The Financial Ombudsman Service. The ombudsman came out in favour of the investor, known only as Mr A, who lost his whole £29,000 pension pot after placing it into a Sipp with Berkeley Burke Sipp Administration.The decision was made in June but the firm took it to a judicial review process and now the ombudsman has announced it will now consider the complaint afresh.After the ruling was published AMPS chairman Neil MacGillivray spoke of fears in the industry of the ramifications.He told Sipps Professional: "In similar scenarios in the past, FOS and the Pension Ombudsman has found in favour of the SIPP operator, therefore there is great concern in the industry that this ruling will set a precedent and lead to an increase in claims."{desktop}{/desktop}{mobile}{/mobile}The ombudsman Roy Milne ruled the firm had failed to ensure that an investment was suitable.Mr A's money was invested in Sustainable Agro Energy, an unregulated scheme.The 51 year-old, had been introduced by an unregulated agent of Sustainable Agro Energy originally in 2011. Berkeley said it was not authorised to give financial advice and did not advise Mr A.It said that it had simply acted on his instructions to arrange the investment. It also said it had carried out due diligence through third party analysts.The ombudsman, in ruling against Berkeley, cited guidance set out in September 2009 on the matter, from the Financial Services Authority.He said: "I am not satisfied that the steps taken by Berkeley were sufficient to meet the guidance issued by the FSA."I am satisfied that if Berkeley had followed the guidance given by the FSA that Mr A would not have started the Sipp."The FOS told Sipps Professional in a statement this week: "The ombudsman issued a decision in June."Following the decision, the business commenced the judicial review process. "The outcome of that process was that the ombudsman will now consider the complaint afresh."

Ruling against firm which sparked Sipp claims fears to be reviewed

Related items