financial services ombudsman credit unions complaint experience
DESCRIPTION
Financial Services Ombudsman Credit Unions Complaint Experience. William Prasifka Financial Services Ombudsman 3 November 2012 National Supervisor Forum Rochestown Park Hotel Cork. NSF. Introduction & Background. NSF. FSO Role. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Financial Services Ombudsman Credit Unions
Complaint Experience
William Prasifka Financial Services Ombudsman
3 November 2012
National Supervisor ForumRochestown Park Hotel Cork
NSF
FSO Role
Independent adjudication on unresolved
disputes between Complainants and Financial Service Providers thereby enhancing the financial services environment for all sectors
NSF
Power of the FSO
• Investigate /Adjudicate complaints • Award compensation up to €250k• Direct Rectification• Findings - legally binding, appealable only
to the High Court • Accessible & Free Service to the
Complainant
NSF
Who can complain to FSO?
• All personal customers
• Limited companies with a turnover of €3,000,000 or less
• Unincorporated bodies, charities, clubs, partnerships, trusts, etc.
NSF
Credit Unions
• Consumers can complain against Credit Unions (Financial Service Providers)
• Credit Unions can complain as
‘consumers’ subject to assessment of jurisdiction and discretion ‘not to investigate’ by FSO
NSF
Credit Unions as Complainants
• Jurisdiction: turnover of €3m equates with CU income
• Discretion of FSO not to investigate: availability of ‘alternative and satisfactory means of redress’
NSF
Role of the FSO
• Fair adjudicator of complaints against regulated FSPs
• Not a consumer advocate
• Not an industry advocate
• Free Service – can engage professional advocates at your own expense
NSF
Standard of Adjudication2004 Act
“The FSO ... is required to act in an informal manner and according to equity, good conscience and the substantial merits of the complaint without regard to technicality or legal form.”
FSO guided, not bound by regulatory codes & law
NSF
Complaint Trends Context
NSF
Complaint Trends – Context
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 ?
?
Total Complaints Received
NSF
Overall Complaints, Up H1 2012
3000
3100
3200
3300
3400
3500
3600
3700
3800
1st & 2nd Qtr 2010
3rd & 4th Qtr 2010
1st & 2nd Qtr 2011
3rd & 4th Qtr 2011
1st & 2nd Qtr 2012
New Complaints
NSF
Complaints Recd– By Sector
NSF
Outcome of Findings (All Products)
NSF
Complaints Against Credit Unions
NSF
Credit Union Complaints
• Small number of complaints made
• Usually less than 1% of Complaints
• Relative Consistency in Complaint Numbers
• As of yet, no ‘spike’ in a particular complaint type
NSF
Complaints against Credit Unions 2009-Sept 2012
NSF
Findings Issued in ContextSince 2005
• Approx 400 Complaints Made against Credit Unions
• 94 Complaints reached Finding stage Remainder are usually ‘closed’ because: • No further Contact 120• Outside Jurisdiction 60• Settled 40 • Referred elsewhere 21
NSF
Finding Outcomes since 2005Points to Note
• Not many complaints received
• BUT Finding outcomes not in line with industry norms
• More complaints upheld against C.U.s
NSF
Outcome of Credit Union Findings Since 2005
NSF
Finding Outcomes Across All Sectors
NSF
Complaint Types 2012
• Customer Care 5 • Maladministration 10• Repayment Terms 7
PPI = Emerging Issue? • Approx 15 PPI mis-selling complaints
against Credit Unions so far in 2012
NSF
Complaint Process
NSF
Complaints ProcedureOverview
1. Lodging a Complaint
2. Initial Assessment
3. Final Response Letter
4. Mediation
5. Investigation
6. Oral Hearing
7. Adjudication & Finding
NSF
Can Uphold Complaint if...... the conduct complained of was unreasonable,
unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory in its application to the complainant;
... although the conduct ... was in accordance with a law or an established practice or regulatory standard, the law, practice or standard is, or may be, unreasonable, unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory in its application to the complainant;
...if conduct was otherwise improper;
NSF
What is expected of CU when handling complaint
Engage with the customer
Understand what the Complaint is
Detailed ‘Final Response’ letter
Ask yourself: Has the CU been reasonable?
Are there grounds for settling or resolving
matters before referral to FSO?
NSF
FSO Experience with Judicial
System
NSF
High Court Appeals
• FSO Findings – Appealable to High Court
• Both FSP and Consumer entitled to appeal
• Currently – Approx 40 HC Appeals (1%)
NSF
Courts hold FSO to High Procedural Standard
• Substantial experience before the Courts
• Full exchange of submissions & opportunity of parties to respond
• Procedures / investigation must reflect the remedy directed
• Request for discovery and jurisdiction must be fully considered
NSF
High Court Appeals – Standard of Review
Not a ‘de novo’ review
“To succeed ... must establish as a matter of probability that, taking the adjudicative process as a whole, the decision reached was vitiated by a serious and significant error or a series of such errors...“
Ulster Bank Investment Funds Limited v Financial Services Ombudsman, 2006
NSF
Judicial Support for FSO
“What has been established: • [FSO] is an informal, expeditious and independent
mechanism for the resolution of complaints ... • not engaged in resolving a contract law dispute in the
manner in which a court would engage with the issues ... • can also make orders of a type that a court would not
normally be able to make ... • possesses a type of supervisory jurisdiction not normally
vested in a court.”
Hayes v Financial Services Ombudsman & Ors – 2008
NSF
Judicial Support for FSO
• Unique Jurisdiction • ‘Plain Language’• Confirmation that the purpose of the FSO is to
keep the process of dealing with quantum of complaints, so far as possible, out of the court
• The Ombudsman is not the correct forum for a party who wants court style remedies
• Courts do not ‘second guess’ awards
NSF
Conclusions
NSF
Complaint Trends & Outcomes
• ‘Paradigm’ Shift
• Consumers’ awareness and willingness to complain
• Product types / complaints may change... ...BUT Complaints remain at record levels
• Increase in challenges to Findings
• Indications are for an increase in Complaints
NSF
Points to Note
• FSO Consistency of approach in Findings
• Cases decided on individual merits
• ‘Fair and Reasonable’ attitude by the Institution?
• Has Institution engaged with Consumer?
• Effort to resolve matters before referring consumer to the FSO?
NSF
Thank you
NSF