We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

FOS vs Small Claims

12346»

Comments

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 41,742 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 11 August at 6:17PM

    The analysis linked by @Nasqueron above breaks down what the complaints are about, and I shared the fact that they accepted roughly two thirds of enquiries as bona fide complaints, although that assumes that the complaint numbers are a subset of enquiries, they could be completely separate populations I suppose.

  • xlnc99
    xlnc99 Posts: 1,784 Forumite
    Seventh Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper

    he was assuming, wasnt fact. He just gave an example of what 100 complaints could possibbly look like. I can do that and say skew the percentages towards and favour i want too - he doesnt know, neither do i. Its not public, only certain figures are which are ones i said. He could be 100% right but we will never know

  • eskbanker
    eskbanker Posts: 41,742 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic

    I wasn't referring to that speculative percentages stuff, but the link to the FOS stats site, where the breakdown of complaints into categories is published…

  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 11,717 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 12 August at 11:30AM

    That was purely an example of a theoretical why a 70/30 split might happen.

    If you look at the link with the published stats on resolved cases it depends on cases as to what % are upheld, I'll paste it again as you missed it

    https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/resolving-complaint/our-insight/annual-complaints-data-and-insight-2025-26

    You can search by uphold rate and see how many they get for each type of case

    It's all well and good to have a little tinfoil hat moment and decide they're rejecting all the cases to help businesses but it's not supported by any evidence. The FOS also publish lots of cases with their reasoning so you can read their reasoning for each case.

    An example of a low uphold rate is packaged bank accounts at 21% for 480 complaints. MSE/Martin routinely mention in newsletters about "reclaiming" but banks are wise to it, so have been sending out the annual statements of benefits to trigger time bar complaints under the 3 year rule (assuming 6 is met also) AND gives them an argument that you can't say you didn't know about the account when they're literally writing to you and telling you. That would explain why in a big part, 79% are rejected - if they can be barred in law then it's not biased against the consumer, it's simply factual.

    Another point is whether something is miss-selling or mis-buying. An example case is DRN1680636, Mr B complained he was mis-sold a packaged account but he took it out online himself, so logically he was not mis-sold as nobody sold it to him, he chose it himself without any involvement from Halifax. Mr B also registered his phone for the phone insurance and drove a car so had use for the breakdown cover; similarly he tried to claim he wouldn't have been covered for travel because of his illness but that developed 2 years after he took out the account. In short, at best, Mr B was misguided in sending a complaint, at worst, a money grubbing liar and his complaint was correctly rejected - but he might go put a 1* review because he thought he'd get 10 years of packaged account fees back and got told to jog on.

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

  • MyRealNameToo
    MyRealNameToo Posts: 4,954 Forumite
    1,000 Posts First Anniversary Name Dropper

    The FOS publishes every case which is escalated for an Ombudsman to review, not just a lot of them.

  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 11,717 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper

    The FOS publishes a lot of cases, they might well publish all the ones from the Ombudsman but not all cases go there, hence my comment

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 355.4K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 456K Spending & Discounts
  • 248K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 605.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.9K Life & Family
  • 263.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.