If you are, or were, a St. James’s Place client and paid for annual reviews or ongoing advice you did not receive, you may be entitled to money back. Talk to us about an SJP claim – the initial consultation is free, with no obligation.
I do not ever want to come across as anti SJP.
I have many colleagues in my extended network who are SJP financial advisers. They are fantastic, committed professionals who have welcomed the recent changes to SJP’s structure and have no problem attracting and retaining investment and pension clients.
There is a simple reason for that: they have always done their job properly.
- They were transparent about fees under the old structure and remain transparent under the new one.
- They win business through referrals from satisfied clients. They have never needed to rely heavily on purchased leads or a business model focused on receiving large payments upfront.
- They are honest about expected performance.
- They build relationships around the quality of their financial planning and protection advice.
- They carry out the annual reviews their clients pay for.
However, in a financial advice business the size of SJP, not every adviser has necessarily operated to the same standard.
The old structure could reward advisers heavily at the beginning of the relationship, particularly when large pensions or investments were transferred. In my opinion, that created a risk that securing the transfer became more commercially important than providing the ongoing service afterwards.
That is part of the background to SJP setting aside £426 million for potential refunds relating to historic evidence of ongoing client servicing. This was not a finding that every SJP adviser had failed their clients, but it was clearly a serious enough issue for hundreds of millions of pounds to be reserved. SJP itself says it will refund charges where its investigation finds that clients did not receive the ongoing service they paid for, and that exercise sits behind many of the SJP claims we are asked about.
The wider issue for me has always been the value clients received from parts of the SJP investment proposition after fees.
Performance has improved more recently, alongside significant changes to its fees, funds and wider offering. That improvement is welcome, but clients are entitled to ask why it took regulatory scrutiny and such a significant structural shake up for the proposition to change.
Despite the improved performance and fairer fee structure, SJP’s net inflows fell from £3.8 billion in the first half of 2025 to £2.7 billion in the first half of 2026, a fall of nearly 29%. SJP has pointed to economic uncertainty, cautious investors and clients making smaller investment decisions, all of which will undoubtedly have contributed.
However, I suspect there is another factor.
Advisers are now having to explain fees more clearly and demonstrate exactly what clients will receive in return.
The advisers who have always sold the value of their advice should be able to have that conversation comfortably. The ones who relied on complicated charges, large upfront payments or clients not fully understanding how they were being charged may be finding it much harder.
Were you an SJP client?
One thing should be very clear. If you are, or have previously been, a St. James’s Place client and paid for annual reviews or ongoing advice that you did not receive, you may be entitled to a refund or redress. That is the basis of a St James Place claim for the ongoing advice charges you paid.
If you were advised to transfer existing pensions, investments or ISAs into St. James’s Place, it may also be worth reviewing whether that advice was suitable and how your current position compares with what may have happened had you remained in your previous arrangements.
Poor performance alone does not automatically mean that the advice was unsuitable. However, you are entitled to understand what you were advised to do, why you were advised to do it and whether the transfer left you better or worse off.
These comparisons are not always straightforward, but you do not have to work them out alone. Nor does exploring an SJP claim cost you anything: our initial assessment is free, and if you go ahead we act on a no win, no fee basis.
To find out whether you may have grounds for a complaint or St James Place compensation, make an enquiry with us today or call 0800 041 8359.
Our summary of the Citywire article
Below is our summary of the article published in Citywire by Jack Gilbert.
St James’s Place’s net inflows fell 28.4% in the first half of 2026, to £2.7 billion from £3.8 billion a year earlier, broadly in line with what analysts expected. Gross inflows were flat at £10.5 billion, but client redemptions rose. In plain terms, money is arriving at the same pace as last year, while more of it is going out the door.
The detail that matters most sits in pensions. Flows into SJP’s pension products, the products most affected by the new charging structure introduced last August, fell 37%, which Citywire reads as a sign the new fee model is now visibly affecting client flows. Its ISAs, which carried no exit fees even before the overhaul, were less exposed.
The numbers were not all one way. Total assets under management rose 9.4% to a record £240.8 billion, helped by investment returns of 16.4% on opening assets. But adjusted profit before tax fell 9% to £278.4 million, reflecting the lower initial and ongoing margins SJP now earns under the new structure, and the shares were down on the morning of the results.
On advisers, the picture is more mixed than the headlines about departures suggest. Some of SJP’s largest practice firms have recently left for competitors, with Prospera Wealth Management and Wellesley Investment Management joining Söderberg & Partners and Sovereign Wealth reportedly in talks to follow. Despite that, total adviser numbers edged up by 17 to 4,951 over the half. Chief executive Mark FitzPatrick told Citywire the group has “a partner retention level of about 90%” and argued that competitor interest in SJP advisers is nothing new.
The article also points to Citywire’s earlier revelation that SJP has overhauled how its partners are paid, moving to monthly advice fees rather than annual payments, a change analysts believe could help with adviser retention.
Taken together: record assets, flat gross inflows, rising redemptions, a 37% fall in pension inflows and thinner margins. The change of model is working through the business exactly where you would expect it to, in the products and the practices where fees now have to be explained and justified openly.
If reading this has raised questions about what you paid SJP and what you actually received in return, talk to us. The first conversation is free, there is no obligation, and if you do have a claim we act on a no win, no fee basis. Call 0800 041 8359 or make an enquiry today.
