The client took his complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) after the unregulated collective investment scheme provided him no income and he couldn’t find out what was going on with his money.
Sesame had argued the appointed representative Moneywise Mortgage and Financial Planning was not an appointed representative because it had breached its permissions by investing in the Cape Verde fund.
Moneywise appeared to know they were breaching Sesame’s rules because they arranged for the Cape Verde commission to be paid into a separate entity with no connection to Sesame, the FOS ruling reveals.
Sesame’s responsibility
However, the ombudsman Doug Mansell did not agree with Sesame that the obscure arrangement over the commission payments and the breach of permissions absolved Sesame of responsibility.
In his verdict Mansell observed that Moneywise was a Sesame representative when it gave the advice and this is what makes the case Sesame’s responsibility.
He ordered Sesame to pay £450 for trouble and upset to the client, known as Mr P in the ruling, and to make good his pension against a benchmark as if it had been invested in way which would have been more appropriate.
Despite the verdict the case is not over for Mr P who has another complaint with the FOS relating to the advice he received when he transferred part of his pension out of the Sipp in May 2012.
