SIPP mis-selling dissected by Court of Appeal

Recent financial services cases have explored the nature of ‘arranging’ in the context of pension transfer scams, while the Upper Tribunal has questioned the regulator’s approach to non-financial misconduct, reports Adam Samuel.

Adam SamuelBA LLM DipPFS MCISI FCIArb Certs CII (MP&ER) Barrister and Attorney may be contacted atadamsamuel@aol.com.For links to where you can buy the second edition of ‘Consumer Financial Services Complaints and Compensation’, see www.adamsamuel.com/book.

After the Spring bonanza of court decisions on financial services, calm could be said to have returned. Nevertheless, the Summer has brought us one important ( FCA v Avacade [1]) and one intriguing ( Adams v Options SIPP (No 2) [2]) decision by differently constituted English Courts of Appeal on the continuing nightmare of self-invested personal pension mis-selling. In Jon Frensham, [3] the Upper Tribunal dented the Financial Conduct Authority’s determination to deduce from the morally unacceptable behaviour of individuals their lack of fitness and propriety to work in financial services.