ANNOUNCEMENT: UK Adviser is now PA Adviser. Read more.

Law firm expects ‘imminent’ Carey Pensions ruling

It will create a statute against which all other Sipp mis-selling cases will be judged


The long-running Adams vs Carey Pensions case could soon reach a conclusion after law firm APJ Solicitors stated on Wednesday that it believes a ruling will be made shortly.

“Many of the claims relating to the Sipp provider had effectively been put on hold due to the Berkeley Burke appeal case,” said APJ solicitor Glyn Taylor.

“However, now the Berkeley Burke appeal is no longer to take place, a ruling for the Carey Pensions case will arrive soon.”

Adams case

When it went to court in March 2018, Adams vs Carey Pensions put hundreds of Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) Sipp claims on hold, pending its outcome.

The crux of the case is the role unregulated introducers played in the alleged mis-selling of investments.

In Adams’ case, he was convinced in 2012 to transfer his modest pension pot into a scheme called Storage First Pods.

Uncertain outcome

Taylor continued: “We predict the outcome of the court ruling will find Carey Pensions did breach section 27 of the Financial Service and Markets Act 2000, as it accepted a Sipp from an unregulated introducer.

“However, as Adams accepted £4,000 ($5,151, €4,632) inducement from the introducer as part of their commission, under the section 28 argument, Carey Pensions may argue that Adams would have proceeded with the investment anyway, without any guidance from a financial adviser.”

When it does arrive, however, Taylor said it “will provide more clarity into the law, particularly in relation to the section 27 argument”.

He added that the ruling “will mean that future Sipp cases who have used an unregulated introducer will be bound by the same arguments as seen in the Carey Pensions case”.


Berekeley Burke entered administration in September 2019 and was immediately sold to Hartley Pensions.

Carey Pensions was acquired by STM Group in October 2018.

At the time, STM acknowledged the ongoing legal dispute, saying it had “secured indemnities and the benefit of significant existing [professional indemnity] cover from the sellers and considers any residual expose to this, and any other historic industry, issues to be minimal”.

Latest Stories