View more on these topics

FOS appoints former Which? boss to lead review into complaints failures

The Financial Ombudsman Service has appointed Money and Mental Health Policy Institute vice chair Richard Lloyd to lead an independent review into its complaints handling process.

The former Which? executive director has been charged with producing a report into FOS’ practices after a Channel 4 documentary earlier this year suggested a number of failures at the adjudicator.

These ranged from allegations that staff were insufficiently trained to deal with “complex” investment and pension complaints, that awards for distress and inconvenience were inconsistent, and that staff did not take complaints over issues such as payday loans and credit cards seriously.

The documentary also alleged that when an MP visited the FOS in 2015, her stay was rehearsed so as to cover over failings. MPs on the Treasury select committee wrote to the FOS calling for a review into the issues raised after viewing the documentary.

Did FOS deserve the Channel 4 treatment?

Setting out its terms of reference for the review, FOS has confirmed that the review will address the issues raised by Channel 4, but will not be limited to the concerns featured in the documentary.

As part of this, Lloyd will look at governance structures and whistleblowing procedures and will look to identify any possible root causes for concern such as staff objectives and the culture of the service.

FOS has also confirmed Lloyd “will be provided with full access and the resources necessary to complete the review” and will have “unrestricted access to all ombudsman service staff and all necessary documents”.

The review will be published in the summer after being completed by the end of June.


Revealed: Fidelity International director investigated over harassment claims

A former Fidelity International female employee is claiming compensation against the asset manager following an alleged case of harassment from senior management, Money Marketing can reveal. The employee, who we will name Mrs A, and who used to be based at one of Fidelity’s offices in India, was sent an employment termination letter on 14 March […]

Steve Bee

Steve Bee: Why still no justice for Waspi women?  

For calls for change to still be falling on deaf ears in 2018 is beyond disappointing There is a serious issue with our pension system today that has been allowed to continue for many years with no resolution. Over 20 years ago, the government decided to require millions of older people in the future to […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 7 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Firstly if this is an independent review, surely it is not down to the FOS to dictate the terms of reference.
    Secondly, will the review include a full assessment of the way advisory firms are dealt with by the FOS, as it is this that requires a total root and branch review. However, I suspect this will be kicked into the long grass and some excuse made as to why this was outside the scope of this review.

    • I agree with your comments except it is down to the advisory community and Libertatem to ensure there is no long grass to kick into! Let’s ensure this is not a lost opportunity.

  2. In answer to your second question, David, No.

    This review isn’t likely to touch on that point because that’s not a concern to anyone – except, of course, us poor saps who have to pay for the service and receive, at best, scorn from it’s staff.

  3. Looks like a great recipe for a nice little cover up cake.

  4. It is criminal that these people do not hold themselves to the same standards if not higher, than the people they are there to protect and serve, and I do mean the consumer and the industry.

  5. So will the reviewer open the doors for comment and consultation? Unlikely sadly and so what sort of review will that be?

  6. More whitewash, must have a ready supply of it.

Leave a comment