A financial advice complaint may concern unsuitable recommendations, misleading information, undisclosed charges, poor administration or an ongoing service that was not delivered. The usual first step is a written complaint to the business responsible.
Quick answer
Complain to the firm, explain the facts and provide supporting documents. For most financial complaints, the firm has up to eight weeks to issue its final response. You can normally refer an unresolved complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service within six months of that response. FSCS may be relevant if the authorised firm has failed.
Key points
- Investment loss alone does not prove mis-selling.
- Identify the regulated firm responsible for the advice.
- Set out what happened, why it was wrong and what remedy you seek.
- Keep the fact-find, suitability report, fees, statements and correspondence.
- The Financial Ombudsman Service is free for consumers.
- Time limits apply, so do not delay when you become aware of a problem.
- FSCS is normally relevant only when a failed authorised firm cannot meet an eligible claim.
What can a financial advice complaint concern?
A complaint can concern the suitability of a recommendation, failure to disclose risk, unclear or excessive charges, delay, administrative mistakes, failure to follow instructions or poor ongoing service.
Examples include recommending a high-risk investment to a client who could not afford the loss, transferring a pension without adequately considering valuable guarantees, or taking ongoing fees without delivering agreed reviews.
A complaint can also concern misleading marketing or a conflict of interest that was not disclosed.
Not every service disappointment is mis-selling. A slow response may be poor administration, while an unsuitable recommendation is an advice issue. Describe the facts rather than relying only on a label.
What does mis-selling mean?
“Mis-selling” is commonly used where a financial product or service was sold in a way that was unsuitable, misleading or failed to meet regulatory requirements.
The assessment normally considers what the adviser knew, what information was gathered, what was recommended and what risks and costs were explained.
Investment loss by itself is not enough. A suitable investment can fall. Conversely, an unsuitable recommendation does not become suitable merely because it happened to make money.
For pension or investment advice, the client’s objectives, risk tolerance, financial capacity, knowledge and experience can be central.
Evidence to gather
- the client agreement and service scope;
- fact-find and risk questionnaire;
- suitability or recommendation report;
- product illustrations and key information;
- fee disclosure and ongoing-service terms;
- statements showing transactions and charges;
- emails, letters, messages and meeting notes;
- evidence of missed reviews or instructions;
- the FCA record for the firm at the relevant time;
- a timeline of events.
Do not alter original documents. Keep copies and organise them by date.
If records are missing, ask the firm for copies. A data access request may also be relevant, but it is not a substitute for making the complaint within time.
Complaining to the firm first
Send the complaint to the legal business responsible. Use the firm’s official complaints contact and keep proof of delivery.
State that you are making a formal complaint. Explain the recommendation or service, why you believe it was wrong, when you became aware and the outcome you want.
A useful complaint is factual and chronological. Avoid overstating points that cannot be supported.
The business should investigate and respond under applicable complaint-handling rules. It may request further information.
The firm’s final response
For most financial complaints, the business has up to eight weeks to provide its final response. Some categories have different rules, but ordinary financial-advice complaints generally use the eight-week period.
The final response should state whether the complaint is upheld, explain the reasons and tell the consumer about the right to approach the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Read the calculation of any offer carefully. Acceptance may settle the complaint. Ask questions if the basis is unclear.
If no response arrives within eight weeks, the complaint may usually be referred to FOS without waiting further.
Referring a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service
FOS is free for consumers and independent of the firm. It assesses what is fair and reasonable, taking account of law, rules, guidance, codes and good industry practice.
Submit the complaint, final response and key evidence. FOS may ask both parties for more information.
An investigator may provide an initial view. If either party disagrees, the complaint may be referred to an ombudsman for a final decision.
A final decision accepted by the consumer becomes binding on the business. If the consumer rejects it, other legal options may remain, subject to limitation and advice.
Complaint time limits
After receiving a valid final response, the consumer normally has six months to refer the complaint to FOS.
General limits also commonly require the complaint to be made within six years of the event or, if later, three years from when the person knew or reasonably should have known they had cause to complain.
Exceptions can apply, including exceptional circumstances, but should not be relied upon. Make the complaint promptly.
Special complaint categories can have different temporary rules. Check current FOS guidance.
How redress may be considered
The aim is often to place the consumer, as far as reasonably possible, in the position they would have been in without the wrongdoing.
This can involve comparing the actual investment with a suitable alternative, refunding fees, compensating lost interest or addressing tax and transaction consequences.
Redress is case-specific. It is not automatically the amount by which an investment fell.
FOS can also consider distress and inconvenience where appropriate, although awards depend on the circumstances.
When FSCS may help
If the responsible authorised firm has failed and cannot pay a valid claim, FSCS may consider eligibility.
For investment advice claims involving firms that failed after 1 April 2019, the compensation limit is generally up to £85,000 per eligible person, per firm. Bad pension advice may also be covered up to that limit.
FSCS investigates the claim and the firm’s status. It does not compensate ordinary market losses.
Check whether the firm has been declared in default and use FSCS directly. The service is free.
The FCA’s role
The FCA regulates firms and can use reports to identify misconduct. It may investigate or take enforcement action.
It does not normally obtain compensation for one consumer or adjudicate the complaint. Reporting serious concerns can still be important.
Suspected unauthorised or clone-firm activity should be reported to the FCA promptly.
Do you need a claims-management company?
No. Consumers can complain to the firm, FOS and FSCS directly without paying a representative.
A claims-management company may charge a fee or percentage of redress. It cannot guarantee success.
Some people value help with complex evidence, but independent legal advice may be more appropriate for high-value or court-related matters.
Read any representative agreement carefully and check regulation where required.
Complaint checklist
- Identify the responsible legal firm.
- Create a dated timeline.
- Gather advice and fee documents.
- Explain the alleged failing.
- Describe the loss or remedy sought.
- Send a formal complaint and keep proof.
- Diary the eight-week response point.
- Diary the six-month FOS referral deadline.
- Check FSCS if the firm has failed.
Frequently asked questions
Can I complain just because my investment fell?
You can complain, but a fall alone does not prove unsuitable advice. Explain why the recommendation or disclosure was wrong.
How long does the firm have to reply?
For most financial-advice complaints, up to eight weeks.
How long do I have to go to the Ombudsman?
Normally six months from the final response, with broader event and awareness limits also applying.
Does FOS charge consumers?
No. The Financial Ombudsman Service is free for consumers.
Can FSCS help if the adviser is still trading?
FSCS normally deals with failed firms unable to meet eligible claims. Complain to a trading firm first.
Will the FCA handle my compensation claim?
Usually no. The FCA regulates firms; the complaint and compensation routes are normally the firm, FOS and FSCS.
Writing a clear complaint letter
Use headings for background, advice given, alleged failing, impact and requested resolution. Quote document dates rather than copying entire reports.
Explain what you believe would have happened without the failing. For example, you may say that you would have remained in an existing arrangement or chosen a lower-risk alternative. Support the statement with contemporaneous evidence where possible.
Complaints involving several firms
A case may involve an adviser, platform, provider and discretionary manager. Identify each role and complain to the firm responsible for the alleged failing. FOS can help determine jurisdiction, but clarity reduces delay.
Do not assume a provider is responsible for independent advice merely because it processed the application.
Distinguishing advice complaints from administration complaints
An advice complaint challenges the recommendation or the way it was sold. An administration complaint concerns how instructions, payments, transfers or records were handled.
The same case can contain both. For example, a pension transfer may have been unsuitable and also delayed. Identify each issue because responsibility and redress can differ.
A platform may be responsible for an execution error while the adviser remains responsible for the recommendation. Direct each allegation to the appropriate business.
Complaints about ongoing advice
Compare the agreement with the reviews actually delivered. Record scheduled meetings, contact attempts, reports and fees.
A client declining or failing to respond to a review can affect the assessment. The firm should retain evidence of reasonable attempts and explain the consequences.
If the service changed, ask when the client was informed and whether charges were adjusted. A vague expectation of availability is not always equivalent to a promised suitability review.
Complaints involving vulnerable circumstances
Health, bereavement, cognitive difficulty, financial distress or communication needs may affect how a firm should provide support.
Explain relevant vulnerability and whether the firm knew or should have known. Keep records of requested adjustments or involvement of a trusted representative.
The Consumer Duty includes expectations around support and foreseeable harm, although the complaint remains fact-specific.
What happens during an Ombudsman investigation?
FOS first checks whether the complaint is within jurisdiction and time. It may request the business file, advice documents and testimony from both sides.
The investigator considers the rules and what is fair and reasonable. The parties can comment on evidence and an initial view.
If unresolved, an ombudsman can issue a final decision. Consumers should read the implications before accepting because acceptance normally makes the decision binding on the business.
Court action and legal advice
Some high-value or complex disputes may justify independent legal advice. Court limitation periods and costs differ from FOS rules.
Starting or accepting one process can affect another. Do not assume that an Ombudsman complaint pauses every legal deadline.
Financial Adviser Hub cannot assess litigation prospects. A solicitor can advise on strategy and limitation.
Tax, benefits and redress consequences
Compensation can have tax, pension or means-tested benefit implications. The business or FOS may consider tax adjustments when calculating redress, but the recipient may still need specialist advice.
Keep redress calculations and payment records. Ask whether the amount includes interest, fee refunds or tax deductions.
Examples of complaint allegations
Excessive investment risk
The consumer may allege that the recommended portfolio exposed essential retirement money to losses they could not afford. Relevant evidence includes the risk assessment, income needs and adviser’s explanation.
Unnecessary pension replacement
The complaint may say that the adviser recommended a transfer without adequately considering guarantees, charges or the option of retaining the existing plan.
Undelivered ongoing service
The consumer may show recurring fees but no agreed reviews, updates or reasonable attempts to arrange them.
Misleading cost disclosure
The issue may involve a percentage fee presented without a cash illustration, omitted platform or fund costs, or an ongoing fee described as one-off.
Causation: connecting the failing to the loss
A complaint must often consider what would probably have happened without the alleged failing. The answer may be retaining an existing product, choosing a lower-risk alternative or not investing.
Contemporaneous evidence is valuable. Notes showing a preference for security or need for access can support the counterfactual position.
Firms may argue that the consumer would have made the same decision anyway. The assessment is fact-specific.
What if the consumer signed the documents?
A signature is relevant evidence but does not automatically make unsuitable advice suitable. The adviser remains responsible for meeting applicable duties.
Equally, a consumer cannot always ignore clear warnings and later claim they were never given. The quality, prominence and explanation of the disclosure matter.
The complaint should address what was understood and how the adviser presented the choice.
Settlements and offers
A firm may make an offer before or during an Ombudsman case. Check whether it is full and final, how it was calculated and whether it includes interest or fee refunds.
Consider tax and benefit consequences. Seek legal advice before accepting a complex settlement or waiver.
Do not assume an early offer is necessarily inadequate, but request the calculation.
Preparing for an Ombudsman submission
Submit a focused chronology, the final response and the most relevant documents. Large unsorted files can obscure the issue.
Explain the remedy sought but allow FOS to assess fair redress. Identify urgent circumstances, vulnerability or impending deadlines.
Respond to information requests promptly and correct misunderstandings in writing.
Sources and further reading
Important: This guide provides general educational information. It is not personal financial or legal advice and does not determine whether a complaint or compensation claim will succeed.
Reviewed by: Financial Adviser Hub Editorial Team. Last reviewed: June 2026.