Consistency in Financial Ombudsman Affordability Complaints

Icecold49

I currently have 6+ complaints in with the Ombudsman about numerous cards and loans. I am struggling to understand the lack of consistency in their investigators findings.

For example, one investigator has agreed that one company should not have given me a loan of £4000 in late 2024 due to the fact that it was plain to see that I was in difficulties. Yet, another investigator sees that a credit card company was correct in giving me two £10,000 limit credit cards a matter of weeks later in early 2025.

I had felt a sense of relief when I started this DMP process to try and get on top of things, but now I feel I am drowning all over again - and it is not being helped at all by mixed messages from the ombudsman office.

Has anyone else found this problem?

Genie10

Yes I am in the same position! I have 5 complaints with the FO.

I have so far had three upheld & two denied. All loans taken at a similar time with same debt & income etc.

Currently in a disagreement with them as on the same letter they stated "loan company calculations are from open banking (bank statements)" and "We can only look at what the loan company would have seen from the data and information they had available to them. We are unable to consider your bank statements"

Honestly it is beyond baffling!

ManyWays

Make your points clear to the investigator and ask them to review the case and for it to be sent to an Ombudsman if they do not change their mind.

Rob5342

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81879681#Comment_81879681

You should definitely do this. They try and put you off doing it by saying that an ombudsman is likely to reach the same conclusion but I had one case where they decided differently.

xgingerx

Hi, i have had over 6 affordability complaints and the majority were upheld by the first investigator, i had about 3 where i had to escalate to an ombudsman for a final decision of which 2 were upheld and 1 was not. I had one where it was upheld, then not upheld by the first investigator, was escalated to the ombudsman who provisionally upheld the complaint, only to then not uphold the complaint. Until you get the final decision you just cant assume anything. Overall though the FO have been a blessing and in most cases the investigator was clear and assessed everything properly, the last one was a shambles back and forth and no one could make their mind up, even the Ombudsman back tracked from the provisional upheld, however once a final decision by an Ombusdman has been made the only option then is court which for me just wasnt worth the risk or cost. I honestly think it really depends and comes down to who the investigator is, their experiance and thoroughness.