Quilter Financial Planning Solutions Limited · DRN-6044899

The complaint Mrs W complains that Quilter Financial Planning Solutions Limited trading as Positive Solutions (Quilter) took commission payments from her investments and provided no service for those payments. What happened In 2012 Mrs W and her husband – Mr W – met with an adviser from a firm which was an appointed representative of Quilter. For simplicity in this decision I will just refer to Quilter as the respondent in the complaint. Quilter’s adviser met with both Mr and Mrs W and carried out a fact find in preparation for providing Mr W with a recommendation regarding his pension in October 2012. As a result of meeting with Quilter Mrs W signed a transfer of servicing request form, for her Individual Savings Account (ISA) and her joint investment account with Mr W. The form for each recipient said, ‘I/we write to inform you that I/we would like the responsibility for the future servicing and renewal commission of the above plans to be transferred to the following company …’. They were signed and dated on 16 July 2012. Mrs W did not receive any advice or review of these policies from Quilter. In September 2024 Mrs W was written to by the provider of her joint investment account. The letter explained that, following a review, it was converting her current holdings to a different share class that had cheaper fund costs. It went on to explain that Mrs W had a financial adviser registered on her account and that the conversion to the new share class would end the trail commission. Mrs W complained to Quilter regarding the payment of trail commission to Quilter on the basis that: it had provided no advice on the set up of the investments, provided no subsequent advice on the funds, and had not been authorised to take the commission. Quilter responded to explain that it didn’t think Mrs W’s complaint should be upheld. It explained that ‘trail commission’ is an annual fee paid to advisers over the lifetime of the recommended product. It explained that Mrs W had signed the transfer of servicing request which included the switching of commission to Quilter. There was no agreement entered into to provide any ongoing advice. Mrs W didn’t accept Quilter’s answer so referred her complaint to our service. One of our investigators looked into the circumstances and explained why he didn’t think Quilter had done anything wrong. Mrs W still didn’t agree that what happened was fair and requested an ombudsman’s decision. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint.

-- 1 of 2 --

For reasons that are essentially the same as those already given to Mrs W, I am not upholding her complaint. In assessing the actions of a business I need to do so with reference to the rules and regulations that were in place at the time of the events in question. What that means here is, I need to consider whether transferring the ‘trail commission’, from the advice firm that was previously in receipt of it to Quilter, was allowed within the rules at the time. And, on this, I’m satisfied that the explanation of the rules that Mrs W has already been given by our investigator is correct. The regulator carried out a Retail Distribution Review (RDR) in 2012 and the changes that it brought about applied after the switching of the trail commission in this case. The changes brought about after the RDR meant that firms could not be paid for ongoing commission without providing an agreed service for that charge. In changing the rules around ongoing charges, the regulator made the decision not to retrospectively change the rules for commission payments that were already in place. Which meant that the commission being paid by Mrs W was still allowed to be paid. I understand that Mrs W explains that she had not authorised the payment. Whilst I can understand her frustration, any trail commission on either the ISA or joint investment account was being paid as part of an earlier contractual agreement. Firms were allowed to transfer the commission payment, which is what I think happened in 2012 when Mrs W signed her authority for that to happen on these accounts. I think that the forms she signed were clear and that she therefore did authorise that. She did not enter into any agreement with Quilter for ongoing financial advice. She was not, therefore being charged for the provision of advice. So it didn’t do anything wrong in not providing advice on those accounts. My final decision For the above reasons, I do not uphold Mrs W’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs W to accept or reject my decision before 27 April 2026. Gary Lane Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --