Financial Ombudsman

Flood2013

Hi, does anyone know for certain what are your rights when complaining to the Financial Ombudsman? If we agree with some of the Adjudicators recommendations but not all, can we go for a full Ombudsman hearing for the points we don't agree on? Thank you

dunstonh

does anyone know for certain what are your rights when complaining to the Financial Ombudsman?

yes

If we agree with some of the Adjudicators recommendations but not all, can we go for a full Ombudsman hearing for the points we don't agree on?

No. If you refer it to an ombudsman, they will re-asses the case looking at all points. Not just those you disagree on. The firm will also be able to put across further comments for the ombudsman to look at.

Flood2013

Hi, another question. Why does the FOS Adjudicator allow the Insurance Co two weeks to review his/her recommendations and they are then allowed to ask them to "reconsider" drawing out the process for months! However, we receive the final ruling and our only option is to accept or refer for a full hearing?

Also, in our ruling it says "it is not our role to punish or fine firms" so there is no incentive for Ins Co''s to act fairly, reply to deadlines etc !

huckster

Remember that the Banks, Insurance companies etc, fund much of the FOS, through the fees they have to pay. The FOS therefore allows the company you are complaining about, time to think about any recommendations and whether to challenge or not.

Many people think that the FOS is not that independent and where they have a strong case, they opt to use the courts instead. But then they have the cost of taking this action and they may end up having to pay the other sides costs. It does not cost you to use the FOS, but the FOS will probably be as helpful to finance companies as they can be, while being as fair to the consumer as they think is right.

dunstonh

Why does the FOS Adjudicator allow the Insurance Co two weeks to review his/her recommendations and they are then allowed to ask them to "reconsider" drawing out the process for months!

Much the same reason the defence goes after the prosecution in a court of law. You are the one making the allegations. They have to answer those. The adjudicator may raise points which the firm has to answer and it is only fair to give them a chance to answer. Y

However, we receive the final ruling and our only option is to accept or refer for a full hearing?

You also have the opportunity to add more. However, in general, the consumer points dont change after the complaint is made.

Also, in our ruling it says "it is not our role to punish or fine firms" so there is no incentive for Ins Co''s to act fairly, reply to deadlines etc !

It is an ombudsman. Not a regulator. There is plenty of incentive to act fairly. The regulator review complaints on their inspections.

kingstreet

FWIW the FOS is the end of the line for us. A decision is binding.

The punter has the right to take the matter to law if unsatisfied with the outcome.

The industry perceives the FOS as too consumer-leaning following a few recent decisions.

The FCA is the body to take disciplinary action where that is considered necessary. The FOS is for individual complaints resolution.

magpiecottage

Flood2013 wrote: »

Hi, does anyone know for certain what are your rights when complaining to the Financial Ombudsman?

Yes - it is something I look at regularly. In essence, what dunstonh and kingstreet say is correct.

An adjudicator will look at a case and give an opinion. If either side does not accept it in full then it will go to an ombudsman who will look at it all again.

The ombudsman will issue a decision at that time. If his decision is substantially different from that of the adjudicator, he will issue a provisional decision so that the side he has swung against has a final opportunity to make a further submission.

Once he issues a final decision there will normally be a deadline for the complainant to accept it. If the acceptance is received by the deadline it becomes legally binding on both sides. If it is not received in time, it is not legally binding on either.

The business can reject an adjudicator's decision and seek referral to an ombudsman. The complainant can accept or reject the adjudicators decision too. However, only the complainant can decide to accept the ombudsman's decision or not.

Generally, about 11 decisions referred to an ombudsman differ materially from the decision of the adjudicator.

Flood2013 wrote: »

Why does the FOS Adjudicator allow the Insurance Co two weeks to review his/her recommendations and they are then allowed to ask them to "reconsider" drawing out the process for months

Since the implementation of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Directive last summer, the process has on the whole sped up. However, as an adjudicator's decision is not legally binding, a business is entitled to check its archives for any further evidence.

Flood2013 wrote: »

However, we receive the final ruling and our only option is to accept or refer for a full hearing?

Actually, until an adjudicator actually refers a case to an ombudsman you can still produce further evidence. In fact, you can do so right up to the point where the ombudsman actually makes his decision.

Also, in our ruling it says "it is not our role to punish or fine firms" so there is no incentive for Ins Co''s to act fairly, reply to deadlines etc !

This is no different to the court system.

If, for example, you are in a car accident, you can sue the driver for recompense for your losses in a civil court. However, if the driver is to be punished, this will be done via a prosecution in a criminal court.

Within the financial services regulatory system, it is for the Financial Conduct Authority, to punish and FOS to award redress just as the criminal court punishes and the civil court awards redress elsewhere.

Flood2013

Hi, We are on our 2nd go round with the FSO Adjudicator for our Household Flooding complaint against our insurance company (this has been ongoing since Xmas 2013 !!).

However, our new complaint we have received nothing. The Adjudicator says as we received monies for our previous case, they believe this is sufficient compensation. Should our previous award be taken into account in subsequent complaints? We did read on this site about claiming for the time we have spent in hours in dealing with our claim, but they said no to this as well.

any views?

Quentin

If not happy then appeal and get this looked at by an Ombudsman rather than an adjudicator.


The Ombudsman's decision will be final. Court action would have to be your next step if you don't like the Ombudsman's finding