Case-study application and professional judgement
Domain 8 - Case-study application and professional judgement
This domain tests integration: given a narrative, can you identify the issues, apply the right rules, weigh the options and justify a decision in writing?
A repeatable method
- Build a timeline: ages, income, dependants, property, debts, existing policies, retirement date. 2) Identify the client's stated needs and any conflicting objectives. 3) Test affordability, including stress and term. 4) Check eligibility, credit and property issues. 5) Consider protection. 6) Compare at least two options, including doing nothing or waiting. 7) Decide, recommend and record why the alternatives were rejected.
Judgement under pressure
Professional judgement means refusing to proceed when the evidence does not support the case: inflated income, undisclosed debt, pressure from a third party, a client who lacks capacity, or an obvious conflict of interest. Recognise vulnerability (health, bereavement, financial difficulty, language, coercion) and adapt the process, signposting specialist advice where the question falls outside your permissions - pension transfers, tax planning, wills and trusts, legal title.
Consumer Duty and records
The Consumer Duty requires evidence of good outcomes: a suitability letter linking needs, circumstances, affordability, product features and cost; a file note of the protection discussion; records of calls and emails; and a review trigger for fixed-rate expiry. Where advice is declined, or a product is unsuitable, record that decision and the reason.
Worked example
A 63-year-old widow wants to release £60,000 to help a grandson's deposit. She has a small pension, no emergency fund, and one daughter who is pressuring her. Correct approach: full fact-find, benefits check, discuss downsizing and alternatives, independent legal advice, capacity and undue influence checks, and a documented discussion of the impact on her estate. If the daughter's influence appears coercive, pause the case and escalate.
Traps
Choosing a product before completing the analysis; ignoring a vulnerability indicator because the client seems confident; failing to document a declined recommendation; and answering the case study in generalities rather than tying each point to this client's facts.