Complaints procedures

The firm must issue a final response within 8 weeks of receipt of the complaint. If the firm fails to do this then the customer may refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) without having received the firm’s final response. Note that a respondant firm may consent to the complainant referring the complaint to the FOS immediately or at any time if the comp...

Shortened demo course. See details at foot of page.

An explanation of the basis of calculation of any compensation or rebate

Terms of the offer in full

Advice that the complainant has six months to refer the matter to the FOS (or that this time limit is waived by the firm).

FOS contact details in full

Shortened demo course. See details at foot of page.

If the comp...

Shortened demo course. See details at foot of page.

If a customer approaches the FOS initially, the FOS will write to the firm complained about and the firm may permit the FOS to intervene immediately or may insist that the matter should be treated in accordance with the firm’s own complaints procedure as if the complaint had been made directly in the first instance.

Where a complaint is referred to the FOS after the firm’s final response then the firm will receive notification and a request for information from the FOS. Firms then have a duty to cooperate fully with the FOS and provide as much information as possible to assist the adjudicator in decision making.

The FOS will adjudicate on the matter and set out a reasoned argument for their decision. At this point either the firm or the complainant can ask for the matter to be referred to an Ombudsman. The adjudicators may be individuals to whom the FOS outsources complaints investigation. The Ombudsmen actually work for the FOS and will re-investigate a complaint fully before making a final decision.

Ombudsman’s final decision

Once an Ombudsman has made a decision on a complaint it is binding on the firm and the firm must, if instructed, provide redress as directed to the complainant. The firm cannot recourse to a court of law.

The Ombudsman’s decision is not however binding on the complainant who may at his option take the matter to a court of law if unhappy with the Ombudsman’s decision.

FOS limits

£355,000 for complaints referred on or after 1 April 2020 about acts or omissions by firms on or after 1 April 2019

£350,000 for complaints referred between 1 April 2019 and 31 March 2020 about acts or omissions by firms on or after 1 Apri...

Shortened demo course. See details at foot of page.

“You have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge.

“The Ombudsman might not be able to consider your complaint if: what you are complaining about happened more than six years ago and you are complaining more than three years after you realised (or should have realised) that there was a problem.

“We think that your complaint was made outside of these time limits, but this is a matter for the Ombudsman to decide. If the Ombudsman agrees with us, they will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances. For example, if the Ombudsman believes the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.

The time limit for referring your complaints to the Ombudsman is usually six months but we will consent to the Ombudsman considering your complaint even if you refer the complaint later than this.”

You consent to waive all applicable time limits. This is what you need to put:

“You have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge.

“Although there are time limits for referring your complaint to the Ombudsman, we will consent to the Ombudsman considering your complaint even if you refer the complaint outside the time limits.”

The firm should consider which option it wishes to take and state accordingly in the final response letter. The option for the respondant firm to allow the FOS to adjudicate even where a claim is legally ‘timed-out’ was created in 2015 to allow firms to give complainants the opportunity to seek redress if they so wish. The reason being that before this became law, a complaint could not be considered by the FOS even if the firm did not wish to invoke the limitation.