What are your experiences of the Financial Ombudsman Service

therightclaim

As an assessor I am often approached by individuals and companies that are not satisfied with the handling of their claim and have necessitated them exercising their rights under the complaints process leading to representations being made to the ombudsman.

The ombudsman has in the past curbed the excesses of errant insurers. As the the insurance claims process becomes deskilled and more system driven, the ombudsman's case load has increased significantly.

I acknowledge that many parties have only made contact with my company as a result of their own failings rather than the attitude of insurers or their adjusters. However, there are a number who have justified complaints which have been ignored by insurers. In some cases the ombudsman's first level of adjudication has repeated insurers position than address the case impartially. The evidence of this is that when the case is then passed up the ombudsman food chain, the ombudsman has frequently over turned the earlier adjudication.

As such I would love to know of your own experiences.
Thanks
Joel

dacouch

......mmm...

dunstonh

The evidence of this is that when the case is then passed up the ombudsman food chain, the ombudsman has frequently over turned the earlier adjudication.

Frequently is probably too strong a word as its still a minority of cases. However, the ombudsman have also changed the decision in favour of the financial services company when they have appealed against an adjudicators decision as well.

I think the biggest issue for consumers at the moment is the level of expectation that many are given by some of the dodgy claims companies for the sort of outcome they are likely to get and how quickly they are going to get it. This almost guarantees disappointment when the FOS do not rule in favour of the consumer. The FOS get the blame and are accused of not being impartial when in reality the complaint should never have been made in the first place.

At the last compliance meeting I went to we were told that by the complaints team that they estimate 1 in 3 complaints being fraudulent or try it on by the consumer. Most of these originate from a claims company and certain claims companies in particular.

therightclaim

Accepted that frequently may be a little strong, but it is concerning that the adjudication process can fail to adequately address a justified complaint.

FlameCloud

From an adjusters point of view I wish there was far more consistency in the decisions made- so at least you know where you stand.

therightclaim

Flamecloud an adjusters lot is not an easy one. The inconsistency of an FOS ruling makes life hard for all parties, as the differing approaches of the various insurers that you instructed by.

It almost makes you wish for the return of the standard fire policy!

Anihilator

therightclaim wrote: »

Flamecloud an adjusters lot is not an easy one. The inconsistency of an FOS ruling makes life hard for all parties, as the differing approaches of the various insurers that you instructed by.

It almost makes you wish for the return of the standard fire policy!

The fact is many claims being made are completely without merit and thus will fail. This isnt because the ombudsman is impartial or crap. Its because there are too many greedy individiuals listening to morron claims companies.

_Andy_

I have only one experience of the Ombudsman, an issue I have at the moment. My experience is they are absolutely dire. Three people dealing with it over the last nine months and all this has resulted in is them finally sending my correspondence on to the insurer in question today. Lame.

MarkyMarkD

My experience, from the non-consumer side of the fence, is that:

(a) they do not adequately assess whether complaints have any validity at all, and fob you back to their official rules which say that they don't have to. Hence completely trumped-up complaints still cost a case handling fee, even if they get rejected at the end of the day for being tosh.

(b) when they do assess complaints, they believe any old baloney the complainant tells them. If the complainant claim any sort of disability, they can add another load of money to the compensation due - once again, even if the complaint had no merit in the first place.

The whole FOS process is way broken. The way firms are charged is completely unfair; the whole concept that individuals should never pay anything is completely wrong; the fact that claims handling companies are not penalised IN ANY WAY if they present spurious complaints is totally wrong.