Ascentric platform at the centre of disputed liability for high-risk investment losses

09/04/25

“Royal London’s (RL) lawyers have argued they did not need to consider ‘the risk of consumer detriment’ when it accepted ‘mini bonds’ onto its Ascentric platform, since advisers were responsible for deciding whether the products were suitable for clients.” [Source: citywire.com, 28/01/2025]

Since Ascentric made the high-risk mini bonds available, the platform has been acquired by M&G. They are now in court with M&G seeking recourse from RL for claims made against Ascentric.

According to court documents, the high-risk mini bonds, offered by Clear Capital and other advice firms, were illiquid and highlight a ‘conflicts of interest’ between the advice firms and the platform, leading to claims for compensation to the Financial Ombudsman and Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) against IFAs who recommended them.

Following its purchase of the Ascentric platform from Royal London, M&G has now set aside £4.2m to cover complaints for compensation to FOS relating to high-risk investments. Whilst the argument over who is ultimately liable does not directly affect claims against advising firms, the ongoing court matter could delay settlements.