Mis-Selling Claims Solicitors — Financial Products, Investments, and Consumer Contracts

Both routes are available and the right choice depends on the size of your claim and the nature of the mis-selling. The FOS is free to consumers and can award up to £415,000 (as of 2024) for complaints against FCA-regulated firms. It uses a "fairness" standard that is often more favourable to consumers than the strict legal test in civil proceedings. For claims below £415,000 against FCA-regulated firms, the FOS is usually the preferred first step — and if the FOS decision is favourable, the firm must comply. For larger claims, or where the FOS declines jurisdiction, a civil claim for misrepresentation or professional negligence may be more appropriate. A solicitor advises on the most effective route for your specific claim.

Potentially — where an investment was described as "low risk" or "capital protected" but was in fact a high-risk or illiquid investment, and you would not have invested if you had understood the actual risk level, there are two potential claims: (i) a misrepresentation claim (false statement of fact — that it was "low risk") and (ii) a suitability claim (the investment was not suitable for your stated risk appetite, under FCA COBS 9A). The FOS and civil courts both assess whether a competent adviser, knowing your circumstances, could have reasonably recommended the product. The "low risk" description and the actual nature of the product are assessed against your specific risk profile and investment objectives.

Not necessarily — a signed risk disclosure document is not conclusive. The FCA's conduct rules require suitability to be assessed in substance, not merely documented. Where the risk disclosure was part of a standard form given without adequate explanation, or where the seller continued to describe the product as low-risk despite the signed document, the document does not cure the mis-selling. The FOS regularly upholds complaints against firms that have risk warnings in their documentation but nonetheless recommended unsuitable products to consumers who did not understand or appreciate the actual risk.

Possibly — the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) provides compensation for eligible claims against FCA-authorised firms that cannot meet their obligations. For investment claims, the FSCS limit is £85,000 per person per firm. For pension transfer advice claims and BSPS-type DB transfer mis-selling, the FSCS covers eligible claims. For claims exceeding the FSCS limit, you may be an unsecured creditor in the insolvency. A solicitor advises on the FSCS eligibility, the level of cover, and any additional routes for recovery.

Yes — the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 Part 4A specifically provides a right to damages for "alarm, distress, and physical inconvenience" caused by an aggressive or misleading practice, in addition to financial loss. For FOS complaints, the ombudsman regularly awards compensation for distress and inconvenience in addition to the financial remedy. In civil misrepresentation claims, distress is not always recoverable — it depends on whether the purpose of the contract was peace of mind or enjoyment, in which case the Jarvis v Swans Tours principle applies.