Published decisions
4,505
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Year + product analysis
Investment and pensions complaints in 2015
A curated public analysis of Investment and pensions in 2015, combining annual and product-level signals from the published Financial Ombudsman decision corpus.
Page summary
4,505 published FOS decisions in Investment and pensions during 2015, with upheld-rate context, firm concentration, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
4,505
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
31.6%
1,426 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 23 Dec 2015
Upheld rate
31.6%
1,426 upheld decisions
Leading firm
Barclays Bank Plc
171 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
822 tagged decisions
Investment and pensions in 2015
4,505 published decisions in the corpus sit in Investment and pensions for 2015. 31.6% of those decisions were upheld, which makes this a strong public cross-section for understanding how one product behaved in one specific year.
Barclays Bank Plc is the most visible firm inside this year-product slice, with 171 published decisions.
- 2015: 4,505 decisions, 31.6% upheld
- Leading complaint theme: Delay In Claim Handling
- Leading precedent signal: Cobs
Firm concentration and issue profile
Barclays Bank Plc, Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (U.K.) Limited, Lloyds Bank PLC, and others are the firms most often associated with Investment and pensions complaints in 2015. This gives a much tighter public view than the standalone year or product pages alone.
delay in claim handling, communication failure, affordability assessment failure, and others are the strongest complaint-theme signals in this year-product combination.
- Barclays Bank Plc: 171 decisions, 34.5% upheld
- Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (U.K.) Limited: 154 decisions, 48.0% upheld
- Lloyds Bank PLC: 152 decisions, 15.1% upheld
- Bank of Scotland Plc: 126 decisions, 22.2% upheld
- The Prudential Assurance Company Limited: 124 decisions, 26.6% upheld
Handling implications and precedent context
The advisory layer for Investment and pensions points to recurring handling implications here, including review cobs precedent (appears in 3.1% of cases), review disp precedent (appears in 2% of cases), review fsma precedent (appears in 1.6% of cases), and others.
There is no strong “what loses” signal exposed for this product at the current advisory granularity.
- Leading complaint theme: Delay In Claim Handling
Representative cases
Recent published decisions in this slice
5 examples shown
DRN001470723 Dec 2015Not upheld
Hargreaves Lansdown Asset Management Limited · Investment and pensions
Mr R complains about the fees charged by Hargreaves Lansdown Asset Management Limited. He says Hargreaves Lansdown should not sell shares to meet its fees, that it sold too many, and that he was not given enough notice to arrange to pay the fees by another method.b... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN025304523 Dec 2015Not upheld
Phoenix Life Limited · Investment and pensions
Mr and Mrs Y complain about the performance of their Phoenix Life Limited mortgage endowment. They say their policy matured with a shortfall and they think Phoenix Life may have mismanaged their endowment.Mr Y has managed the complaint. backgroundIn 1989 Mr and Mrs Y ... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN030012123 Dec 2015Not upheld
Lloyds Bank PLC · Investment and pensions
On behalf of his parents, Mr A1 complains that Lloyds Bank plc sold them a whole-of-life policy that wasn’t right for them. background Mr and Mrs A took out a joint whole-of-life policy through Lloyds (then TSB) in 1991. The policy had a sum assured of £3,000, which w... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN066748723 Dec 2015Upheld
L J Financial Planning Ltd · Investment and pensions
Mr and Mrs N complain about the advice LJ Financial Planning Ltd (LJFP) gave to them. They say that they were advised to invest in an EEA Life Settlement fund because it was low risk. But in fact it was a high risk investment and they have now lost money. backgroundI... (6 pages)
View source decisionDRN083949923 Dec 2015Not upheld
HSBC Bank plc · Investment and pensions
Mr and Mrs S complain that HSBC Bank plc mis-sold them a decreasing term assurance policy. They were told it was a condition of their mortgage borrowing but they already had enough cover through their company benefits.backgroundIn mid 2001, Mr and Mrs S met with an ... (2 pages)
View source decision