MP pressures for changes to FOS review

rejected stamp

Financial Ombudsman Service plans to review past decisions remain too process-driven despite an important change to how they will be judged says MP Nicky Morgan.

FOS is planning to review decisions made soon after it reorganised in 2016, and has provided details of its proposed methodology to the Treasury select committee.

It outlined a two-stage process, where Deloitte will review a sample of cases to see if they adhered to the required standards, before former Claims Management Regulator board member Carol Brady then looks at any cases that did not apply the right controls to see what the outcomes have been.

In October MPs on the Treasury select committee led by Morgan slammed FOS plans for how it will review past cases for evidence of poor decisions.

In previous correspondence Morgan criticised the plans for placing “too much emphasis on process” and raised concerns about the about the proposed ‘Wednesbury reasonable test’.

The test says a FOS decision would have to be considered irrational as well as unreasonable to be deemed wrong.

Morgan has objected to this proposal and said “this is an extremely high bar as decisions can be poor without necessarily being Wednesbury unreasonable”.

In correspondence published today, FOS chief executive Caroline Wayman has reconsidered using the ‘Wednesbury reasonable test’, and will use an alternative test, which is whether the outcome is safe.

Morgan has praised this change and says: “The FOS’ decision to change how the outcome of cases in the second stage of the review will be assessed is welcome. ‘Wednesbury reasonableness’ set the bar far too high for cases in the second stage.”

But she adds: “The review remains too process-driven and doesn’t focus enough on case outcomes. Only 150 cases, or 1.9 per cent, of the 8,000 cases from the relevant period will have their outcomes examined.

“It will be difficult, therefore, to conclude whether there were systematic issues with case outcomes if the sample in stage two is not significant in size.

“The committee will no doubt examine these issues in further detail when it takes evidence from the FOS once the case review is completed in the New Year.”

Recommended

31

Nic Cicutti: Adviser anger at FOS is misplaced

The number of upheld complaints outside the 15-year liability period demanded is tiny and falling Do you ever get that kind of uneasy feeling where you do a piece of work for a client but have a niggle at the back of your mind about something you might have missed? I had that sensation a […]

6

MPs slam plans for FOS review

MPs on the Treasury select committee have slammed the Financial Ombudsman Service’s plans for how it will review past cases for evidence of poor decisions. FOS is planning to review decisions made soon after it reorganised in 2016, and has provided details of its proposed methodology to committee chair Nicky Morgan. FOS has outlined a […]

Royal Court of Justice High Court 480
11

FOS ruling cannot add new duties for Sipp providers, court hears

Upholding a Financial Ombudsman Service ruling against a Sipp provider over due diligence failures would not create new requirements for the market as a whole, a judicial review into the decision has head. A court is currently hearing arguments as Berkeley Burke challenges a ruling that it, as a Sipp provider, could be held responsible […]

5

Fears protection commission disclosure will turn clients off advisers

As new disclosure rules bring the full extent of protection commissions into the spotlight, experts are asking if this will see clients ditch their advisers in favour of execution-only services. Under the Insurance Distribution Directive, from 1 October advisers have had to provide clients with information before a product sale about any commission received, which […]

Partied out and penniless

December has left me destitute. My piggy bank lies broken and empty, my lunchtime meal deal feels like an extravagant expense and I’m down to the Bountys in my box of Celebrations. But I won’t mourn my dearly departed pennies. Between buying gifts for loved ones (then deciding to keep them for myself) to treating […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. So why do advisers have to use the Wednesbury test when challenging the FOS?

    One rule for clients and another for firms… and this is fair how?

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com