Is SJP’s £430 million redress scheme a PR exercise or a smokescreen?

We have been pursuing complaints against St James’s Place (SJP) for over 3 years now as have many of our peers which resulted earlier this year in the announcement that SJP put aside a reported £430 million pounds make redress to their clients who have been paying for ongoing advice fees without receiving annual reviews.

On the surface this looks like a philanthropic decision to make right the wrongs of their financial advisers which have affected hundreds of thousands of SJP’s Pension, Investments and Financial Planning clients.

However, is this just a smoke screen to deter clients from pursuing independent claims against SJP?

To understand this, you first need to understand how and where SJP advisers may have failed.

Firstly, it should be noted that SJP are by no means the worst financial advisers in the UK. Their products and services are, on the whole, well-considered. They have many satisfied clients, their academy trains financial advisers effectively, and as the largest financial advice firm in the UK, their compliance and oversight have generally been very good.

The issue they have accepted and are prepared to pay redress for relates purely to ongoing servicing fees, which are deducted as a percentage of clients’ pensions and investments. These fees are supposed to include regular reviews (at least annually), which have not been carried out. This can affect any client who pays ongoing charges as part of their SJP portfolio and has not received regular reviews.

However, what if the damage caused by a St James’s Place adviser to your finances is significantly worse than just taking some annual fees, such as:

• Advising you to transfer a Defined Benefit Pension
• Advising you to transfer other pensions with guarantees
• Advising you to invest in a bond or other investment which was not suitable for you
• Consolidating your pensions from other platforms to more expensive ones with them?

High Costs

What many people fail to recognise is that SJP advisers are not independent; they only sell SJP products, and SJP’s products have always been relatively expensive compared to other available options. This is fine if you are starting from scratch, but if SJP transfers your funds from a cheaper policy to their platform, then those fees can impact your growth, and the costs can be significant! If you believe this has affected you, it may be worth exploring SJP’s Claims to seek potential compensation for any financial losses.

Poor Performance

To make matters worse, SJP funds have never been market-leading in terms of performance. Here is a recent article showing how, even now, as they strive to be more transparent and competitive, more than 25% of SJP’s funds fail to deliver value for money.

What does this mean?

If you were convinced to transfer existing pensions, ISAs, or investments to SJP, it’s worthwhile to obtain a true valuation of what those schemes would be worth today had you not moved them. While there is no protection against poor performance, if you have suffered significant losses as a result of the transfer, this is something you absolutely have the right to pursue.

How do I get a valuation?

A notional transfer value can be requested from your original providers; however, this is something we handle as part of our claims process. We write to all of your providers, and once we have the information, our experts run a calculation and provide you with a free valuation. With our guidance, you can make an informed decision on how best to pursue your claim against SJP or any other regulated company involved that may be at fault.

You can schedule free consultation here or why not speak to one of our SJP experts on 01618401560.

Check your claim eligibility for free here