Carey Pensions UK (now operating as Options UK Personal Pensions) is the SIPP operator at the centre of two landmark Court of Appeal decisions — Adams v Carey [2021] and Fletcher v Options UK [2024] — that established the FSMA s.27 unwinding right and the constructive knowledge standard. Carey/Options is in FSCS default. Multiple FOS decisions have been upheld.
Start your free assessment →Carey Pensions UK Ltd — later renamed Options UK Personal Pensions LLP — was a major SIPP operator that accepted thousands of clients via unregulated introducers, including Spanish-registered brokers operating without FCA authorisation. The most significant introducer was CLP (Commercial Land and Property Brokers), which directed clients into Store First storage pod investments.
In the landmark Adams v Options SIPP [2021] EWCA Civ 1188, the Court of Appeal held that because Mr Adams was introduced by an unregulated intermediary, the SIPP contract was unenforceable under FSMA s.27. The remedy is unwinding — the client is entitled to the return of the full transfer value as if the contract had never been entered into. The suitability of the investment is irrelevant.
In R (Options UK) v FOS [2024] EWCA Civ 541 (Fletcher), the Court of Appeal confirmed that Options should have discovered that a director of CLP was listed on the FSA warning list from October 2010. Publicly available information is sufficient to establish constructive knowledge — and execution-only contractual disclaimers cannot protect an operator that failed to check publicly available regulatory warnings.
The following decisions are a matter of public record held in the FOS decisions database. Summaries are factual and based on published ombudsman findings. Decision references can be verified at financial-ombudsman.org.uk.
The ombudsman found Options should have conducted more thorough due diligence before accepting the Store First investment into its SIPP. If it had done so, it would have declined to accept the investment. The complaint was upheld and Options was directed to put the claimant back in the position they would have been in had they remained in their original pension arrangements.
The ombudsman found Options did not conduct adequate due diligence before accepting the Cape Verde4 Life investment into a client SIPP. Options' execution-only status was found not to exempt it from its regulatory obligations under FCA Principles 2, 3, and 6. The complaint was upheld and Options directed to compensate the claimant based on their remaining in their original pension scheme.
The ombudsman upheld the complaint finding Options had failed in its regulatory obligations by accepting business introduced by Cape Verde4 Life, an unregulated firm. Options' position that it operated on an execution-only basis was rejected. The FOS applied the Berkeley Burke standard and directed Options to compensate the claimant on the basis they would have remained in their original pension arrangements.
The FOS found Options failed to conduct adequate due diligence on TPS Land, an unregulated Spanish firm, and Store First. Critically, the FOS found that a director of TPS Land's associated firm appeared on the FSA warning list — publicly available information Options failed to check. This decision directly preceded the Fletcher [2024] Court of Appeal ruling which confirmed this constructive knowledge standard as binding law.
Carey Pensions / Options UK is in FSCS default. Direct FSCS claims are open. The FSCS is actively processing claims relating to Store First, Cape Verde, and other investments placed into Options SIPPs via unregulated introducers.
Up to £85,000Adams v Options UK [2021] EWCA Civ 1188 confirmed that where your introducer was unregulated at the time of transfer, the SIPP contract is unenforceable under FSMA s.27. The remedy is full unwinding — the entire transfer value is recoverable regardless of the FSCS cap. This is the most powerful route available in Options UK cases.
Full transfer value — FSMA s.27Options UK operators know the time limits — they rely on them. The FOS absolute clock runs six years from the date of transfer. For Store First and Cape Verde investments made between 2011 and 2016, this clock may be at or near expiry for some claimants. However, the three-year awareness clock runs from when you first knew or ought to have known — and the FSMA s.27 civil route has different limitation considerations. If you received an annual valuation showing a significant loss, your awareness clock may have started from that date. Do not assume you are out of time without a formal assessment. See redressadvisory.com/time-limits for the full limitation framework.
Figures are indicative only and based on typical case profiles. Your actual position depends on your specific circumstances, the transfer value, and the applicable claim route. Not a guarantee of outcome.
FSMA s.27 provides that if a SIPP is established through an unregulated intermediary, the contract is legally unenforceable. The remedy is full unwinding — you are entitled to the return of the full transfer value as if the contract never existed. This bypasses the suitability question entirely and is not limited by the FSCS £85,000 cap. Adams v Options UK [2021] EWCA Civ 1188 confirmed this right.
Store First was an unregulated storage pod scheme promoted by a network of commission-driven brokers. Clients were typically offered incentive payments (cashback) to transfer their pensions into Options/Carey SIPPs and invest in Store First pods. The pods are now effectively worthless.
Fletcher v Options UK [2024] EWCA Civ 541 confirmed that operators who accepted business from introducers appearing on the FSA/FCA warning list cannot rely on execution-only terms as a defence. If your introducer was on the warning list at the date of your transfer — and many were — the due diligence failure is established by publicly available information. This significantly strengthens claims against Options UK.
If your FOS complaint was rejected and you accepted that decision, your FOS route may be closed. However, the FSCS route (now that Options is in default) and the FSMA s.27 civil route operate independently. A formal assessment will clarify which routes remain open for your specific case.
No obligation · No upfront cost · We will never cold-call you