Guinness Mahon SIPP Case

The FOS adjudicator concluded that Guinness Mahon should have refused the introduction of business. This is because they were aware the client was given advice by unregulated introducer Avacade.

The adjudicator has stated that they should have had doubts over the competence and motivation of Avacade. Guinness Mahon should also haveĀ been aware that its business model was likely to result in consumer detriment.

The FOS has ruled that Guinness Mahon should have refused the introduction of business and should pay fair compensation.

Cases
Guinness Mahon opened a self-invested personal pension scheme
Sipp provider faces fresh claim over unsuitable investment
Mis-sold Pensions Make a complaint about Guiness Mahon SIPP pensions
FOS upholds second case in two weeks against Guinness Mahon
Sipp firm Guinness Mahon faces claims over unregulated introducers
Troubled Sipp provider looks for sale as losses mount
Cases issues against SIPP administrator Guinness Mahon
APJ issue cases against Guinness Mahon
FOS decision on Guinness Mahon Sipp case

The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has upheld a self-invested personal pension (Sipp) mis-selling complaint. It is related to a high-risk investment made within a Guinness Mahon Sipp.

The complaint is unique in receiving a decision while many other cases appear to be halted.

Guinness Mahon SIPP Case
The FOS adjudicator concluded that Guinness Mahon should have refused the introduction of business. This is because they were aware the client was given advice by unregulated introducer Avacade.The adjudicator has stated that they should have had doubts over the competence and motivation of Avacade. Guinness Mahon should also have been aware that its business model was likely to result in consumer detriment.

Sipp firm Guinness Mahon faces claims over unregulated introducers

A law firm has issued five cases against Sipp administrator Guinness Mahon Trust Corporation over allegations it worked with unregulated introducers to facilitate non-standard investments.Solicitor firm Anthony Philip James & Co says five claimants allege they were put into investments not suitable for their needs.The cases relate to investments between 2013 and 2016, into schemes including Ethical Forestry and Global Plantations.

This is the latest case APJ has filed against a Sipp firm over allegations of misselling. It is also preparing to issue a further 20 cases against Guinness Mahon in the coming weeks.APJ solicitor Glyn Taylor says FCA guidance issued in 2013 to remind Sipp providers of their regulatory responsibilities in relation to Sipp investments has not always been taken on board.

Five cases issued against SIPP administrator Guinness Mahon

The FOS adjudicator concluded that Guinness Mahon should have refused the introduction of business. This is because they were aware the client was given advice by unregulated introducer Avacade.