Understanding St James's Place Compensation – Overcharging for Ongoing Advice Explained

If you're a client – current or former – of St James's Place (SJP), you've probably seen headlines about overcharging and potential refunds. This issue has been brewing for a while, and as we start 2026, many people are still waiting for resolution. I'll explain it clearly and factually, based on what SJP and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) have publicly stated.

What Is the Overcharging Issue?

SJP is one of the UK's largest wealth management firms, advising on pensions, investments, ISAs, and more. Their model includes charging clients an ongoing advice fee – typically around 0.5% per year (on top of other fund charges) – for regular reviews and financial guidance from their advisers.

The promise: Clients should receive annual (or regular) check-ins to review their circumstances, portfolio, and goals.

The problem: In many cases, these reviews didn't happen consistently, or there wasn't clear evidence they did. Clients continued paying the fee anyway, sometimes for years. This became a big issue after the FCA's Consumer Duty rules (introduced in 2023) required firms to prove they're delivering "fair value" for fees charged.

SJP admitted that record-keeping was incomplete, especially before they upgraded their systems in 2021. As a result, thousands of clients may have overpaid for services they didn't fully receive.

How Did This Come to Light?

In late 2023 and early 2024, complaints spiked. SJP reviewed client files and found gaps in evidencing ongoing servicing. In February 2024, they announced a £426 million provision (money set aside) to cover potential refunds for these historic issues, mainly from 2018 onwards.

The company also overhauled its fee structure: simplifying charges, reducing some ongoing fees, and planning to remove early exit penalties for new clients from late 2025.

In January 2025, the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) ruled in a test case that SJP should pay compensation, reinforcing that clients deserve refunds where services fell short.

Are You Eligible for Compensation?

Possibly, if:

• You were (or are) an SJP client and paid ongoing advice fees.
• You didn't receive regular reviews (e.g., annual meetings or updates) as expected.
• This applies mainly to periods from 2018, but some claims go further back.

Even if you're no longer a client, or the investments have matured/sold, you might still qualify.

SJP is proactively reviewing records and contacting affected clients. If they can't prove the service was delivered, they'll refund the relevant fees plus compensatory interest.

What's the Latest as of January 2026?

The review process is ongoing and has taken longer than expected – it's complex, involving millions of records. Some clients have received refunds already, but many are still waiting. Reports from 2025 noted delays, with some people waiting years for promised payments.

The £426m provision remains the key figure (though some sources mention adjustments like reductions to £340m or increases). SJP says no client action is needed – they'll reach out directly if you're due money.

If you've complained already, your case is in the queue. Using a claims management company (CMC) is an option, but they can take up to 30-40% + VAT in fees, and SJP warns you get the full amount by dealing directly.

What Should You Do?

1. Check your statements – Look for ongoing advice charges (often labelled as such).
2. Contact SJP directly – Use their complaints process or the historic servicing review page on sjp.co.uk for free assessment.
3. Consider the FOS – If unhappy with SJP's response, escalate to the free Financial Ombudsman Service.
4. Be cautious with claims firms – Many advertise heavily, but direct claims mean you keep 100%.

Average refunds vary widely – from hundreds to thousands per client, depending on investment size and years affected. It's not a blanket payout like PPI; it's case-by-case.

This is about fairness under FCA rules, not widespread mis-selling of products (though some separate mis-advice claims exist). SJP has apologised and is working to fix it.

For the most up-to-date info, check SJP's website or the FCA/FOS sites. If you have details about your policy, I can help guide you further based on public info!