Transact Self Invested Personal Pension · CAS-108335-P4M3

CAS-108335-P4M3

Ombudsman’s Determination Applicant Mr E

Scheme Transact Self-Invested Personal Pension (Transact SIPP)

Respondent Integrated Financial Arrangements Ltd (IFAL)

Outcome

Complaint summary

Background information, including submissions from the parties and timeline of events The sequence of events is not in dispute, so I have only set out the salient points. I acknowledge there were other exchanges of information between all the parties.

• a transfer value of £226,237.31 from tranche one capped drawdown; and

• a transfer value of £231,615.62 from tranche two capped drawdown. This was in respect of a previous transfer to the Standard Life SIPP from Legal & General.

1 CAS-108335-P4M3

• Mr E had been told by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) that IFAL had informed it that his gross drawdowns for the 2022/23 tax year totalled £46,446.

• It had produced a cash transaction listing for 2022/23 (the Listing) using the Platform. This showed gross drawdowns totalling £43,006 for 2022/23. The difference was £3,440, which appeared to show that an extra month had been included in HMRC’s figure.

• It asked IFAL to provide the correct information to HMRC.

• The Listing was for the SIPP wrapper and did not include the transactions for the SIPP-Tranche 1 wrapper which had been closed, as instructed by Mr E, after the June 2022 drawdown.

• So, the Listing had produced the results it would have expected as the IFA had only viewed the information relating to the wrappers in force at the time.

2 CAS-108335-P4M3 • If the IFA also required details of the transactions on Mr E’s closed wrapper, it should have selected the ‘Closed Wrapper’ option. It could also have contacted IFAL’s customer services department for information on Mr E’s closed wrapper.

• It had carried out all drawdown requests from Mr E’s wrappers as he had instructed. There was sufficient information available to Mr E to calculate the income he had received.

• Mr E had been taxed correctly and it would not look to pay a personal tax liability where no error had occurred.

• Each tax year he took the maximum possible drawdowns up to the 20% tax threshold as he did not want to pay 40% tax. For the 2022/23 tax year, he intended to do the same, making a final adjustment to the drawdown in March 2023.

• Using the information in the Listing, he withdrew £9,046 in March 2023, understanding this to use up his 20% tax band limit. He was then surprised to discover that he had incurred an extra £688 tax charge above the 20% tax rate because 40% tax had been charged on £3,440 of his drawdowns.

• IFAL had not taken into account the information available to the IFA on the Platform at the time that Mr E made his March 2023 withdrawal. He provided two screenshots which showed:

o a transaction listing screen where the “Select All” option had been chosen, and this expanded out to show two wrappers: “General investment Account” and “SIPP” (Screen 1); and

o a transaction listing screen where the “Select All” option had been chosen, and this expanded out to show three wrappers: “General investment Account”, “SIPP” and “SIPP – Tranche 1 (closed)” (Screen 2).

• Screen 1 showed two wrappers which would indicate that both of his wrappers were included, and so he would expect the report that was generated to include all his transactions.

• Only by clicking on a “More Options” drop down did Screen 2 appear showing three wrappers which would suggest both wrappers and the closed wrapper were included. The IFA then had to click on the “More Options” drop down again before “Show closed options” appeared.

3 CAS-108335-P4M3 • IFAL should repay him £688 in recognition of the extra tax he had been charged. He considered this to be as a result of the lack of clarity and transparency in the information IFAL had provided.

• IFAL said that he could have contacted its customer services department. However, at the time, he believed he had a full understanding of the situation, and so this would not have been necessary.

Adjudicator’s Opinion

• The Adjudicator said that, in complaints like this, he had to come to a conclusion on a balance of probabilities basis as there was no evidence to prove what options the IFA selected when generating the Listing. Nor did the Adjudicator have access to the Platform to generate some test reports. However, even if he did, he would have no way of being sure that the way the Platform was working at the time was identical to the way it was working in March 2023, when the Listing was generated.

• On the balance of probabilities and, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the Adjudicator’s view was that the Platform was operating in the way that IFAL had described when the Listing was generated. In particular, had the Listing been generated directly after the transaction listing option had been selected, then details relating to the SIPP – Tranche 1 wrapper would not have been included as it was a closed wrapper. Further, the Adjudicator took the view that the user should have been aware of this, as this wrapper was not one of the two wrappers listed on Screen 1.

• In the Adjudicator’s opinion, had the user progressed to Screen 2 and generated the Listing from here, details relating to the SIPP – Tranche 1 wrapper would have been included as it was one of the three wrappers shown on this screen.

• The Adjudicator was also of the opinion that both Mr E and the IFA would have been aware of the existence of the SIPP – Tranche 1 wrapper as they were involved when it was closed by IFAL, at Mr E’s request.

• So, the Adjudicator did not take the view that the IFA obtained misleading information from the Platform. So, the Adjudicator did not agree that IFAL was

4 CAS-108335-P4M3 responsible for any additional tax liability incurred by Mr E as a result of his reliance on the information in the Listing.

Ombudsman’s decision

I do not uphold Mr E’s complaint.

Dominic Harris

Pensions Ombudsman 21 February 2025

5 CAS-108335-P4M3 Appendix IFAL’s summary of the gross payments made to Mr E in the 2022/23 tax year

Date Gross payment

1 June 2022 £3,440 6 June 2022 £6,440 7 July 2022 £3,440 8 August 2022 £3,440 7 September 2022 £3,440 7 October 2022 £3,440 7 November 2022 £3,440 7 December 2022 £3,440 9 January 2023 £3,440 7 February 2023 £3,440 7 March 2023 £9,046

Total £46,446

6