In this update we take a look at recent court judgments and Ombudsman decisions that have important implications for SIPP and SSAS providers.
Cases: Landmark Carey Pensions ruling and other key judgments
Does any of your SIPP business come via unregulated introducers? If so, do you understand how the Court of Appeal's landmark Carey Pensions judgment might mean that your agreements with members are unenforceable? Do you know which parts of the FCA's guidance the Court of Appeal disagreed with? What are the "red flags" that an unregulated introducer may be giving investment advice? We consider these and other issues arising from the Court's judgment here.
If members see that a Pensions Ombudsman complaint is not going their way, can they withdraw the complaint in order to bring court action instead? Is reliance on incorrect financial advice a reasonable excuse for a late application for lifetime allowance protection? For more detail on what recent cases tell us about these and other issues, see our Cases update.
Can trustees refuse to progress a transfer if they can't decide whether the receiving scheme is a QROPS or not? How can scheme providers protect themselves against claims from members who incur unforeseen tax charges? Should an e-mail to a member's IFA shortly before the member's death be treated as an expression of wish form? What will the Ombudsman's approach be if a member objects to a scheme's request to see a passport or birth certificate before paying benefits? How has the Ombudsman recently changed his approach to transfers made around the time the Regulator issued its "Scorpion" leaflet? We look and these and other issues in our Pensions Ombudsman update.
Financial Ombudsman Service: approach to economic and domestic abuse
We take a look at what the Financial Ombudsman Service is saying about what amounts to economic abuse and how it will approach claims involving allegations of economic abuse. For more detail, click here.