Options UK Personal Pensions LLP v Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Options UK Personal Pensions LLP v Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

The Ombudsman was entitled to rely on Principles for Businesses, guidance, and best practice to find that the SIPP provider failed to carry out adequate due diligence on the introducer and investment, and to award compensation for the resulting loss, even though such duties are not actionable in court. The Ombudsman gave adequate reasons and did not act irrationally.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Options UK Personal Pensions LLP; Defendant/respondent: Financial Ombudsman Service Limited; First Interested Party: Simon Fletcher; Second Interested Party: Financial Conduct Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Claim for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
SIPP Provider Duties, Financial Ombudsman Jurisdiction, Principles for Businesses, Due Diligence, Compensation for Pension Losses
Financial Regulation Administrative Law Pensions Law SIPP Provider Duties Financial Ombudsman Jurisdiction Principles for Businesses Due Diligence Compensation for Pension Losses

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Options UK Personal Pensions LLP

Claimant/appellant

Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Defendant/respondent

Simon Fletcher

First Interested Party

Financial Conduct Authority

Second Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Ombudsman must explain departure from legal standards when awarding compensation
  2. 2 Whether a SIPP provider owes duties to prospective members to carry out due diligence on introducers and investments
  3. 3 Whether the Ombudsman’s findings were irrational or unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Ombudsman was entitled to rely on Principles for Businesses, guidance, and best practice to find that the SIPP provider failed to carry out adequate due diligence on the introducer and investment, and to award compensation for the resulting loss, even though such duties are not actionable in court. The Ombudsman gave adequate reasons and did not act irrationally.

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • No relief granted to Claimant