SIPP pension mis-sold?

magpiecottage

Following a pm exchange with the OP, I have ascertained:

The crook was an Appointed Rep of Personal Touch (a network of IFAs).

Clearly Personal Touch would not have allowed this business to go through its books so the crook got the idiot to put it through his business.

The idiot is directly authorised so he has not breached any network rules.

Regardless of whether the idiot actually advised the OP or not, he signed off the application and allowed a wholly inappropriate transfer to go through.

Therefore the idiot is liable. Whether, and how, he attempts to recover his loss from the crook is his problem, not the OP's.

The idiot has 8 weeks from the date he received the letter to get a response into the post to the OP.

The OP does not say when FOS wrote to the adviser but I would hazard a guess that it was at least two weeks ago.

Unless the idiot offers proper redress to the OP within 8 weeks he should go back to FOS and ask that the matter be accepted for investigation. The idiot will, no doubt, protest his innocence but in the end FOS can make the decision legally binding.

All the OP has to do is complain that he was not told of the risks of the recommended investment and it was unsuitable. The crook's reasons are irrelevant.

ozzage

Excuse my ignorance, but WHY would the second IFA put his name to this? To make a cut from the commission? As a favour to a friend?

dunstonh

ozzage wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but WHY would the second IFA put his name to this? To make a cut from the commission? As a favour to a friend?

That I fear will go answered. I cannot for one minute think of a good reason why a genuine IFA would allow extremely high risk business (where the FSA position was mis-sold unless proven otherwise) to be processed through their agency. Stupidity is the only thing that comes to mind. Possibly naivety. However, common sense and business sense were clearly lacking.

mark55man

perhaps the "idiot" had OP down as flaky (sorry OP) and hence unlikely to pursue or perhaps he was also indebted to the "crook"

above all else I think "idiot" is probably running very nervous now OP is showing his mettle

thanks to Linton for the SFO link very interesting to see who else is up there - Barclays / Autonomy ...

magpiecottage

ozzage wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but WHY would the second IFA put his name to this? To make a cut from the commission? As a favour to a friend?

I believe I answered your questions when I said:

magpiecottage wrote: »

There is a real IFA who is an idiot because he signed off something without first checking it was suitable.

jamesd

And there is one IFA who has been charged in what are the first prosecutions under the new Bribery Act. There is no rule that says there cannot be more charges against other people later.

Norfolk_Norris

Hi Guys

Jus ta quick update - heard nothing from the advisor#1 until today, when he messaged me with "hi - back off holiday now; have you sorted the letter to the FOS yet?"

Just for the record, he called me 3 weeks back asking me to withdraw my complaint and notify the FOS I would be withdrawing my complaint to him and pursuing advisor#2 through the courts.

I am assuming pursuing advisor #2 though the courts would more than likely be expensive and fruitless due to him a) not being identifiable (on paper) as the advisor that suggested the fund, and b) him not actually being able to advise at the time?

As advisor #1 is the named advisor on the papework and it was submitted through his company, this has got to be the most straight forward option, using the FOS if necessary?

Any guidance much appreciated, as always.

Thanks
Norris

doughnutmachine

Norfolk_Norris wrote: »

Hi Guys

Jus ta quick update - heard nothing from the advisor#1 until today, when he messaged me with "hi - back off holiday now; have you sorted the letter to the FOS yet?"

Just for the record, he called me 3 weeks back asking me to withdraw my complaint and notify the FOS I would be withdrawing my complaint to him and pursuing advisor#2 through the courts.

I am assuming pursuing advisor #2 though the courts would more than likely be expensive and fruitless due to him a) not being identifiable (on paper) as the advisor that suggested the fund, and b) him not actually being able to advise at the time?

As advisor #1 is the named advisor on the papework and it was submitted through his company, this has got to be the most straight forward option, using the FOS if necessary?

Any guidance much appreciated, as always.

Thanks
Norris

Just get the complaint in to the FSA with all the information you have. It's really up to the FSA to investigate the case with the two IFAs and apportion blame.

I wouldn't think of suing either of the IFAs at this stage. It's possible the FSA will get compensation for you anyway.

Keep us posted anyway.

dunstonh

Just get the complaint in to the FSA with all the information you have. It's really up to the FSA to investigate the case with the two IFAs and apportion blame.

The FSA no longer exist. It's replacement, the FCA, do not handle consumer complaints (nor did the FSA). It will just send the complaint onto the firm(s) in question.

The complaints process can handle this fine. The complaint goes to the firm that processed the business. If that firm rejects the complaint then the OP refers it to the FOS.

Norfolk_Norris

Hiya - quick update.

17/12/13 was the 8th week since the original complaint was made; no official response has been received (aside the odd phone call to ask me to withdraw the complaint and chase IFA#1 through the courts.

I guess now I tell the FOS I have had no response?

Many thanks and Happy Christmas!