Can a person take the Financial Ombudsman to Court?

[MarieAbraham]

They are a public ombudsman and subject to judicial review, according to their website, but they are also listed on companies house...

[EXC]

I'm not sure what you're asking. If you issue judicial review proceedings against them you are taking them to court.

[MarieAbraham]

"we're a public body and we can be judicially reviewed. A judicial review usually focuses on the process an ombudsman has used to make their decision, not on the facts and evidence of the dispute itself. You'd probably need to get legal advice before starting judicial review proceedings. "

From https://www.financial-ombudsman.org....make-decisions.

I am assuming there is some sort of official procedure for asking for this judicial review, and that is different from taking them on in the Small Claims Court.

[EXC]

I assume this is to do with an FOS decision you're not happy with? If so you can't dispute that in a small claims court. The only way to legally challenge it is by way of judicial review, which is complicated, big bucks, high court litigation which if you lose could you a fortune in costs.

[MarieAbraham]

I want to hold them directly responsible for a bungled case review they handled from start to finish. Me vs. a High Street Bank. Their bungled conclusions will be a definite negative in a Court case were I to go against that bank, and I would prefer to litigate against the Ombudsman, show their failings, and claim the compensation from them that they should have awarded.

I know it is essentially asking for a review fo the case, but it is only about £300, and I think they would rather settle, rather than have their massive failures brought to light. Seriously, they took what the bank said, which fully supported my claim, and trusted the banks lies as to how it supported their Defence instead, hence their shocking conclusions. They were asked what evidence they were using to support their findings, and instead of telling me, where I could have told them their mistakes, they would not disclose it, and further, they had an Ombudsman's final read of the case done TWO WEEKS after I asked for it, which is not normal. Everyone else waits six months or more. Total cover-up.

[Guest]

I did - the process is a Judicial Review of their decision. There are strict time limits - there is info on the Civil Practice Rules, or you may get help on here.

It is in the Court of Appeal, I didn't have to pay a court fee because of my low income but I had to pay £2500 when I lost ( they asked for £22500 but I pleaded poverty and there is something in the Rules that limits a litigant in persons losses under certain circumstances).

in my case, essentially the FOS and their ombudsman colluded with Zurich insurance who withheld evidence to prevent disclosure of damage their builders caused to my house by piling when they mistakenly decided the property was subsiding.

Although I lost, I had satisfaction in "naming and shaming" in court!

best of luck

Just a thought- I wouldn't assume that a court case will necessarily be open and above board - at the time my impression was that the judge was actively preventing me disclosing certain evidence in court.

[echat11]

All Ombudsman services are pretty much the same, they try to balance things out, even when you can prove 'umpteen failures' of the organisation. There are so many other ways to get the 'Financial Ombudsman' service bad press. You could write a blog, a Review on Trustpilot, etc (they've got a score of 1.4 and 89% of Reviews are BAD, so they are living up to their BAD reputation). The problem essentially is the Organisation, the bank in your case pays them to look into your case, a financial relationship exists, so the 'bias' exits. I know The Treasury Select Committee were investigating how the Financial Ombudsman functioned (rather didn't functioned). The Financial Ombudsman offered to Review some cases again where complainants felt their were errors made. I can tell you that the Chief Ombudsman''s Appeal Service at the time was 'flawed' as much as the Financial Ombudsman service.

[MarieAbraham]

I did - the process is a Judicial Review of their decision. There are strict time limits - there is info on the Civil Practice Rules, or you may get help on here.

It is in the Court of Appeal, I didn't have to pay a court fee because of my low income but I had to pay £2500 when I lost ( they asked for £22500 but I pleaded poverty and there is something in the Rules that limits a litigant in persons losses under certain circumstances).

in my case, essentially the FOS and their ombudsman colluded with Zurich insurance who withheld evidence to prevent disclosure of damage their builders caused to my house by piling when they mistakenly decided the property was subsiding.

Although I lost, I had satisfaction in "naming and shaming" in court!

best of luck

Just a thought- I wouldn't assume that a court case will necessarily be open and above board - at the time my impression was that the judge was actively preventing me disclosing certain evidence in court.

Can I ask, was this judicial review started as a Small Claims case?

[EXC]

Applications for judicial review have to be made to the Administrative Court, there is no other avenue. The fee to apply for permission for judicial review is £154 and if you're granted permission the fee to proceed is £700.

[MarieAbraham]

So what would happen if I started a Small Claims case against their company address?

[EXC]

The claim would get struck out and you'd lose the claim fee and possibly have to pay the defendant's strike out application fee.

[echat11]

https://committees.parliament.uk/wor...dsman-service/

[Guest]

Can I ask, was this judicial review started as a Small Claims case?

No - EXC Site Owner has provided the information.

I have done this three times. As I said, I lost my claim against the FOS. A second JR application was against a housing association, not really appropriate and I lost. So two payments each of £2500 to the winning Defendant.

The first time I did it was a medical negligence case in about 2001. I should have won but I was too ill and messed it up. The appeal judge was kind, said I should look for something specific in the evidence and I could appeal. I have recently found the court papers; if I were to do it now I wouldn't make the same mistake, it was winnable. There are grounds for appeal but I am now too ill and too tired. The reason for the medical negligence JR was that very serious injuries caused in a car accident were misdiagnosed, further injuries were caused by doctors and my private consultant and personal injury solicitor constructed a fraudulent personal injury claim. No solicitor would take my case because of their criminality. Even though I lost the JR application, I didn't have to pay - I think because of the circumstances.

Anyway going back to what you ask - there is help available for litigants in person, both by studying the Civil Procedure Rules on the Court web site and in person at the Court of Appeal (Administrative Court?) in London where there is a branch of the Citizens Advice Bureau. You might try asking the Citizens Advice Bureau locally if there is a pro bono lawyer who would help?

In 2016 (my claim against the FOS) this is what I had to do:
Get together all my evidence, carefully underline in pencil the bits of evidence I was relying on, as well as the FOS decision I was challenging. (There is now a list available on the Court website of all documents necessary to claim JR, not available when I did it). Put this in an index, include a skeleton argument, fill in the correct form (don't rely on my memory but it may have been N4?) File it at the Court of Appeal (Administrative Court?) in London with correct fee. Procedures may have changed but I remember one copy of all the paperwork for the Defendant and two copies for the Court - a lot of paperwork, not forgetting my own copy!

I had to go to London and appear before a Judge to ask permission to claim JR. When refused, I asked the Judge for permission to appeal and then there was a short time (a week?) to appeal the Judge's decision. I had to appear before a second Judge.

So - a hearing to ask for permission to claim Judicial Review. A hearing before a second Judge to appeal the first Judges refusal. The second Judge can refuse again or give permission to claim JR.

I remember a single Judge in my FOS permission hearing in 2016, a single Judge in my permission hearing against a housing association, but THREE judges - one in fancy red robes - when I tried to claim against the Health Service in 2001.

Anyway I have no legal knowledge or qualifications whatsoever and I am definitely not offering advice - the purpose of my post is just to try explain my experience with what went on with my own Judicial Review applications.

Best wishes