Yellow abstract of floor level.
  1. Home >
  2. Perspectives >
  3. Financial Services - Regulatory & Risk >
  4. Spot the Difference? Uncertainty continues for SIPP administrators and trustees in the wake of the Berkeley Burke decision

SHARE:

Subscribe

Spot the Difference? Uncertainty continues for SIPP administrators and trustees in the wake of the Berkeley Burke decision

14 May 2015. Published by Rachael Healey, Partner

Please see our latest legal alert following the recent Pensions Ombudsman decision on the duties of SIPP Trustees when it comes to SIPP investments.

The decision of the Pensions Ombudsman stands in stark contrast to the decision issued by FOS last year, where FOS upheld a complaint against Berkeley Burke as SIPP administrator in respect of investments made by an individual of his entire pension pot in an esoteric investment.  The Pensions Ombudsman found that there were no obligations on Berkeley Burke as SIPP Trustee in contrast to FOS' decision that there were duties on a SIPP administrator to consider a member's investments.  The FOS decision remains subject to a "review" having been pulled from the website last year.  The legal alert looks at the detail of the two decisions and the different conclusions drawn.  Unfortunately the decisions leave SIPP Administrators and SIPP Trustees in a difficult position with results on seemingly the same facts leading to a different result dependent on the forum.