Transferring an ISA - original signed form needed?

Riddler24

I'm trying to transfer a share ISA from Provider A to my existing share ISA at another provider (Provider .  The process has got stuck because Provider A insists on receiving the original signed request form which I sent to provider B, but provider B says that scanned copies of request forms are normally accepted by transferring providers and is being really difficult about getting hold of the original request form from its paper archives.  Who is right?  Is there a legal position, or an industry position, on this? 
Thanks for any light you can shed on this - I have been struggling to find the answer!  I just want to know who to complain to...

Riddler24

Bother emojis...that should say Provider B, not Provider sunglasses face...

eskbanker

Provider A (who are they btw?) can apparently insist on a signed form, according to https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transfer-an-isa-if-youre-an-isa-manager#transfer-apps

The ISA application form or transfer instruction can be made via the application not in writing process. However, it is possible that the old ISA manager will require the transfer authority form to be signed by the investor before he will agree to release the funds. This is something for managers to resolve – the ISA regulations do not do away with the requirement for a signature if one is required by the old manager’s terms and conditions.

Riddler24

Thanks - I've had a look at the guidance you have linked to, and I think it may not be as clear as that.  The "application not in writing" process appears to be where the customer doesn't sign anything at all; I've gone through the "application in writing" process by completing and signing the form.  The guidance says that "Applications in writing include faxes of signed application forms, scanned copies of signed application forms attached to emails and email applications with electronic signatures".  So that looks as if a scanned copy of the form should be accepted by Provider A - I could even have sent a scanned copy to Provider B, although in practice I sent the original by post.   Have I interpreted it properly?
Provider A is M&G, by the way...

eskbanker

I take your point that scanned copies can be deemed an adequate alternative to originals within the ISA regulations (especially in the context of the ISA application process rather than the inherently more transient transfer one), i.e. by HMRC, but don't see anything that actually compels providers to accept these?

Riddler24

I suppose it comes down to the interpretation of the guidance - does it mean that scanned copies are sufficient and therefore the provider has to accept them, or that scanned copies are ok if the provider wants to accept them?  I expect there's legislation somewhere which specifies it...

Riddler24

Definitely worth putting the argument forward anyway, although I doubt I'll get anywhere with the call centre!  Thanks for your help :-)

eskbanker

Riddler24 said:

I suppose it comes down to the interpretation of the guidance - does it mean that scanned copies are sufficient and therefore the provider has to accept them, or that scanned copies are ok if the provider wants to accept them?  I expect there's legislation somewhere which specifies it...

Happy to be proved wrong if you find something, but it would surprise me if there was any legislation compelling an ISA provider to accept a scanned copy of a document rather than an original, especially given the above quote and the ISA transfer timescales being specified to include postal times, together with the fact that some transfers are conducted electronically while others still use cheques (i.e. there's little evidence of detailed prescriptive legislation).  M&G's Ts & Cs do state that they need instructions to be in writing, although that doesn't necessarily clarify anything in the context of how that can actually be interpreted!

Riddler24 said:

Definitely worth putting the argument forward anyway, although I doubt I'll get anywhere with the call centre!  Thanks for your help :-)

Up to you obviously, but unless you can point to something authoritative that makes it clear that their position is unlawful, it would seem likely that they'll stick to their guns....

masonic

Riddler24 said:

Definitely worth putting the argument forward anyway, although I doubt I'll get anywhere with the call centre!  Thanks for your help :-)

I wouldn't bother with the call centre. Personally, I'd gather any relevant details for the transfer from Provider B and then send formal written authorisation for M&G to process the transfer to them by post (this could just be another transfer form filled out with exactly the same details, but sent directly to M&G). I'd then raise a formal complaint against both providers citing their unreasonableness in dealing with each other and inability to find a compromise that would allow the transfer to proceed without my intervention.

I agree with eskbanker that no rules are being broken, but this isn't Treating Customers Fairly, so in my view neither provider is meeting their regulatory obligations in dealing with this problem. Particularly "Outcome 6: Consumers do not face unreasonable post-sale barriers imposed by firms to change product, switch provider, submit a claim or make a complaint."

dunstonh

The process has got stuck because Provider A insists on receiving the original signed request form which I sent to provider B, but provider B says that scanned copies of request forms are normally accepted by transferring providers and is being really difficult about getting hold of the original request form from its paper archives.  Who is right?

Provider A is within their right to use wet signatures.   Provider B should know this because whilst some do accept electronic copies (some don't even require an application form), others require a wet signature and they must deal with these companies on a regular basis.

Is there a legal position, or an industry position, on this? 

No.  There are several transfer methods that can be used.

Provider A is M&G, by the way...

And the fund houses are the most common providers that insist on paper.

No rules being broken here. Just provider B being a bit of a pain.  The default action is to attempt electronic first and if not used, then revert to paper.  Its been that way for many years.