DISP Dispute Resolution: Complaints

You are viewing the Handbook in the past on 14/12/2007

Used in

Export part as

DISP INTRO

Introduction

DISP INTRO 1

Introduction

  • 01/12/2004

Access for retail consumers to mechanisms for dealing with complaints about financial services firms is a key part of the regulatory regime. The Act gives the FSA the power to make rules relating to the handling of complaints by firms and provides for the establishment of an independent dispute resolution scheme (the Financial Ombudsman Service) to resolve complaints about financial services firms quickly and with minimum formality. The body established to administer and operate this scheme (the "scheme operator") is the Financial Ombudsman Service Limited ("FOS Ltd").

In addition, the Consumer Credit Act 2006 has amended the Act giving the Financial Ombudsman Service power to make rules for the resolution of certain disputes against holders of standard licences (licensees) issued by the Office of Fair Trading under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

This module of the FSA Handbook contains the rules and guidance relating to the handling of complaints by firms and licensees and to the operation of the Financial Ombudsman Service. Responsibility for the rules relating to the Financial Ombudsman Service is shared under the Act between the FSA and the FOS Ltd, with those rules and other requirements written by the FOS Ltd being subject to approval by, or the consent of, the FSA.

Under the Act, the Financial Ombudsman Service comprises three jurisdictions: (a) The Compulsory Jurisdiction covers firms which are required to participate in the Financial Ombudsman Service in respect of complaints about activities specified by the FSA [and unauthorised persons subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints]; (b) The Consumer Credit Jurisdiction covers licensees which are required to participate in the Financial Ombudsman Service in respect of complaints specified by the Financial Ombudsman Service and arising in the course of consumer credit activities;(c) The Voluntary Jurisdiction can cover financial services activities not included in the Compulsory Jurisdiction or the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction. Both firms and unauthorised firms can participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction by contractual agreement with the FOS Ltd (in accordance with the Standard Terms - see below) and are known as VJ participants.



Although the authority to make the rules relating to the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction and the Voluntary Jurisdiction derives from different sections of the Act, the provisions have been co-ordinated to ensure that, wherever possible, they are identical.



Chapter 1: Complaint handling procedures for firms and licensees

These rules set out the complaint handling procedures which firms and licensees capable of giving rise to an eligible complaint under the Compulsory Jurisdiction or the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction (see Chapter 2) must establish. In relation to the Compulsory Jurisdiction, they are made by the FSA under section 138 of the Act and paragraph 13 of Schedule 17 to the Act. In relation to the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction, they are made by the Financial Ombudsman Service under Paragraph 16B of Schedule 17 to the Act subject to approval by the FSA. These rules, with some exceptions, are applied to VJ participants by contract via the Standard Terms set by the FOS Ltd (Chapter 4).



Chapter 2: Jurisdiction Rules

These rules set out the scope of the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction and the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. They specify who can refer a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service and the time limits for doing so, as well as which activities are covered by the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction and the Voluntary Jurisdiction. The rules also set out the territorial scope of the Financial Ombudsman Service. They are relevant to consumers who may wish to refer complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service; to firms which are subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction; to unauthorised persons who are subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints; to licensees which are subject to the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction; to VJ participants and to the Ombudsman himself. The rules relating to the scope of the Compulsory Jurisdiction are made by the FSA (under section 226 of the Act); the rules relating to the scope of the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction are made by FOS Ltd under section 226A of the Act, with FSA approval; the rules relating to the scope of the Voluntary Jurisdiction are made by the FOS Ltd, with FSA approval (under section 227). The rules relating to the time limits for referring a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service are made by the FSA under paragraph 13 of Schedule 17 to the Act and are applied to VJ participants by contract via the Standard Terms set by the FOS Ltd.



Chapter 3: Complaint handling procedures of the Financial Ombudsman Service

These rules apply to the Ombudsman, to firms, and to unauthorised persons who are subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints and to licensees who are subject to the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction. They are also relevant to complainants. They set out how the FOS Ltd and, in particular, the Ombudsman will handle complaints under the Financial Ombudsman Service. For the purposes of the Compulsory Jurisdiction, they comprise the scheme rules and the costs rules (made by the FOS Ltd, with FSA consent or approval, under paragraph 14 of Schedule 17 and section 230 respectively) and rules made by the FSA on the kinds of loss or damage that can be compensated, including the maximum amount which can be awarded (s229). For the purposes of the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction, they comprise rules made by the Financial Ombudsman Service with FSA approval under paragraph 16B (1) of Schedule 17 to the Act. These procedural rules are applied to VJ participants via the Standard Terms.



Chapter 4: The Standard Terms

The Standard Terms are made, with FSA approval, by the FOS Ltd under paragraph 18 of Schedule 17 to the Act and are the contractual terms by which VJ participants participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction.
  • 01/12/2004



Appendix 1: Relevant Existing Complaints

The Ombudsman Transitional Order, made by HM Treasury under sections 426-428 of the Act, extends the scope of the Financial Ombudsman Service to enable it to deal with complaints about pre-commencement business where these could have been handled by a former scheme ("relevant complaints") and makes special provision for the handling of these complaints.

It distinguishes between:

(a) relevant existing complaints (ie complaints referred to, but not determined by, a former scheme (other than the Personal Insurance Arbitration Service) before commencement (see article 2 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order); and

(b) relevant new complaints (ie complaints referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service after commencement which relate to a pre-commencement act or omission, in respect of which the firm was, immediately before commencement, subject to a former scheme) (see article 3 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order).

The Order enables the FOS Ltd, with only a few exceptions, to handle relevant new complaints in accordance with its new procedures, as set out in DISP 1 to 5 and these are covered in the main body of the DISP rules. Except as otherwise indicated, the term "complaint" in DISP 1 to 5 therefore includes a relevant new complaint.

However, the Ombudsman Transitional Order makes different provision for the handling of relevant existing complaints (ie complaints which the former schemes have partly completed at commencement). These complaints will be passed over to the Financial Ombudsman Service by the former schemes (except the Personal Insurance Arbitration Service) at commencement and the Ombudsman Transitional Order requires the FOS Ltd to complete the handling of these cases. However, it provides that the Financial Ombudsman Service must do this, in a significant number of respects, in accordance with the procedures of the relevant former scheme. The arrangements for dealing with these complaints are set out in DISP App 1. This describes the ways in which relevant existing complaints must be treated differently from other complaints dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service, but cross refers to the provisions in DISP 1 to 5, where appropriate. (DISP 1 explains how complaints which are partly completed by firms (as distinct from former schemes) at commencement are to be handled.)
  • 01/12/2004



Appendix 2: FSA's guidance on handling mortgage endowment complaints

DISP App 2 contains FSA's guidance to firms on handling mortgage endowment complaints.
  • 01/12/2004

Export chapter as

DISP 1


Treating complainants fairly

DISP 1.1

Purpose and application

Purpose

DISP 1.1.1

handbook-guidance
This chapter contains rules and guidance on how respondents should deal promptly and fairly with complaints in respect of business carried on from establishments in the United Kingdom or by certain branches of firms in the EEA. It is also relevant to those who may wish to make a complaint or refer it to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

Background

DISP 1.1.2

handbook-guidance
Details of how this chapter applies to each type of respondent are set out below. For this purpose, respondents include:
(1) persons carrying on regulated activities and covered by the Compulsory Jurisdiction (firms);
(2) persons covered by the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction (licensees); and
(3) persons who have opted in to the Voluntary Jurisdiction (VJ participants).

Application to firms

DISP 1.1.3

handbook-rule
(1) This chapter applies to a firm in respect of complaints from eligible complainants concerning activities carried on from an establishment maintained by it or its appointed representative in the United Kingdom.
(2) For complaints relating to the MiFID business of a firm, the complaints handling rules and the complaints record rule:
(a) apply to complaints from retail clients and do not apply to complaints from eligible complainants who are not retail clients;
(b) also apply in respect of activities carried on from a branch of a UK firm in another EEA State; and
(c) do not apply in respect of activities carried on from a branch of an EEA firm in the United Kingdom.

DISP 1.1.4

handbook-rule
Where a firm has outsourced activities to a third party processor, DISP 1.1.3 R does not apply to the third party processor when acting as such, but applies to the firm which is taking responsibility for the acts and omissions of the third party processor in respect of the outsourced activities.

DISP 1.1.5

handbook-rule
This chapter does not apply to:
(1) a UCITS qualifier;
(2) a credit union; and
(3) an authorised professional firm in respect of expressions of dissatisfaction about its non-mainstream regulated activities

DISP 1.1.6

handbook-guidance
Analogous obligations relevant to credit unions are set out in CRED 17.

DISP 1.1.7

handbook-rule
This chapter applies to the Society, members of the Society and managing agents, subject to the Lloyd's complaint rules.

DISP 1.1.8

An insurance intermediary, that is not also an insurer, must have in place and operate appropriate and effective procedures for registering and responding to complaints from a person who is not an eligible complainant.
[Note: article 10 of the Insurance Mediation Directive]
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.1.9

A complaint about pre-commencement investment business which was regulated by a recognised professional body will be handled under the arrangements of that professional body and is outside the scope of this sourcebook
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.1.10

handbook-rule
In relation to a firm's obligations under this chapter, references to a complaint also include an expression of dissatisfaction which is capable of becoming a relevant new complaint or[deleted] a relevant transitional complaint.

FSAVC Review

DISP 1.1.11

handbook-rule
Where the subject matter of a complaint is subject to a review directly or indirectly under the terms of the policy statement for the review of specific categories of FSAVC business issued by the FSA on 28 February 2000, the complaints resolution rules, the complaints time limit rules, the complaints record rule and the complaints reporting rules will apply only if the complaint is about the outcome of the review.

Exemptions

DISP 1.1.12

handbook-rule
(1) A firm falling within the Compulsory Jurisdiction which does not conduct business with eligible complainants and has no reasonable likelihood of doing so, can, by written notification to the FSA , claim exemption from the rules relating to the funding of the Financial Ombudsman Service, and from the remainder of this chapter.
(2) Notwithstanding (1), the complaints handling rules and complaints record rule will continue to apply in respect of complaints concerning MiFID business.
(3) The exemption takes effect from the date on which the written notice is received by the FSA and will cease to apply when the conditions relating to the exemption no longer apply.

DISP 1.1.13

handbook-guidance
SUP 15.6 refers to and contains requirements regarding the steps that firms must take to ensure that information provided to the FSA is accurate and complete. Those requirements apply to information submitted to the FSA under this chapter.
  • 01/11/2007

Application to licensees and VJ participants

DISP 1.1.14

handbook-rule
This chapter (except the complaints record rule and the complaints reporting rules) applies to licensees for complaints from eligible complainants.

DISP 1.1.15

handbook-rule
This chapter (except the complaints record rule and the complaints reporting rules) applies to VJ participants for complaints from eligible complainants as part of the standard terms.

DISP 1.1.16

handbook-guidance
Although licensees and VJ participants are not required to comply with the complaints record rule, it is in their interest to retain records of complaints so that these can be used to assist the Financial Ombudsman Service should it be necessary.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.1.17

handbook-rule
In relation to the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction only, FOS Ltd may dispense with, or modify, the application of the rules in this chapter to licensees where it considers it appropriate to do so and is satisfied that:
(1) compliance by the licensee with the rules would be unduly burdensome or would not achieve the purpose for which the rules were made; and
(2) it would not result in undue risk to the persons whose interests the rules were intended to protect.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.1.18

handbook-guidance
This power is intended to deal with exceptional circumstances, for example, where it is not possible for a licensee to meet the specified time limits, and any dispensation or modification is likely to be rare.
  • 01/11/2007

Outsourcing of complaint handling

DISP 1.1.19

handbook-guidance
(1) This chapter does not prevent:
(a) the use by a respondent of a third party administrator to handle or resolve complaints (or both); or
(b) two or more respondents arranging a one-stop shop for handling or resolving complaints (or both) under a service level agreement.
(2) These arrangements do not affect respondents' obligations as set out in DISP or the provisions relating to outsourcing by a firm set out in SYSC 8 and SYSC 13.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.1.20

handbook-guidance
Further guidance on the application of this chapter is set out in the table in DISP 1 Annex 2.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.2

Consumer awareness rules

DISP 1.2.1

handbook-rule
To aid consumer awareness of the protections offered by the provisions in this chapter, respondents must:
(1) publish appropriate summary details of their internal process for dealing with complaints promptly and fairly;
(2) refer eligible complainants in writingto the availability of these summary details at, or immediately after, the point of sale; and
(3) provide such summary details in writing to eligible complainants:
(a) on request; and
(b) when acknowledging a complaint.

DISP 1.2.2

handbook-rule
Where the activity does not involve a sale, the obligation in DISP 1.2.1R (2) shall apply at, or immediately after, the point when contact is first made with an eligible complainant.

DISP 1.2.3

handbook-guidance
These summary details should cover at least:
(1) how the respondent fulfils its obligation to handle and seek to resolve relevant complaints; and
(2) that, if the complaint is not resolved, the complainant may be entitled to refer it to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 1.2.4

handbook-guidance
The summary details may be set out in a leaflet, and their availability may be referred to in contractual documentation.

DISP 1.2.5

handbook-guidance
Respondents may also display or reproduce the Financial Ombudsman Service logo (under licence) in:
(1) branches and sales offices to which eligible complainants have access; or
(2) marketing literature or correspondence directed at eligible complainants;
provided it is done in a way which is not misleading.

DISP 1.3

Complaints handling rules

DISP 1.3.1

handbook-rule
Effective and transparent procedures for the reasonable and prompt handling of complaints must be established, implemented and maintained by:
(1) a respondent; and
(2) a branch of a UK firm in another EEA State.
[Note: article 10 of the MiFID implementing Directive]

DISP 1.3.2

handbook-guidance
These procedures should:
(1) allow complaints to be made by any reasonable means; and
(2) recognise complaints as requiring resolution.

DISP 1.3.3

handbook-rule
In respect of complaints that do not relate to MiFID business, a respondent must put in place appropriate management controls and take reasonable steps to ensure that in handling complaints it identifies and remedies any recurring or systemic problems, for example, by:
(1) analysing the causes of individual complaints so as to identify root causes common to types of complaint;
(2) considering whether such root causes may also affect other processes or products, including those not directly complained of; and
(3) correcting, where reasonable to do so, such root causes.

DISP 1.3.4

handbook-guidance
A firm should use the information it gains from dealing with complaints that relate to MiFID business in accordance with this chapter to inform its compliance with its obligations to monitor the adequacy and effectiveness of its measures and procedures to detect and minimise any risk of compliance failures (SYSC 6.1).

DISP 1.3.5

handbook-guidance
A firm should have regard to Principle 6 (Customers' interests) when it identifies problems, root causes or compliance failures and consider whether it ought to act on its own initiative with regard to the position of customers who may have suffered detriment from, or been potentially disadvantaged by such factors, but who have not complained.

DISP 1.4

Complaints resolution rules

DISP 1.4.1

handbook-rule
Once a complaint has been received by a respondent, it must:
(1) investigate the complaint competently, diligently and impartially;
(2) assess fairly, consistently and promptly:
(a) the subject matter of the complaint;
(b) whether the complaint should be upheld;
(c) what remedial action or redress (or both) may be appropriate;
(d) if appropriate, whether it has reasonable grounds to be satisfied that another respondent may be solely or jointly responsible for the matter alleged in the complaint;
taking into account all relevant factors;
(3) offer redress or remedial action when it decides this is appropriate;
(4) explain to the complainant promptly and, in a way that is fair, clear and not misleading, its assessment of the complaint, its decision on it, and any offer of remedial action or redress; and
(5) comply promptly with any offer of remedial action or redress accepted by the complainant.

DISP 1.4.2

handbook-guidance
Factors that may be relevant in the assessment of a complaint under DISP 1.4.1R (2), include the following:
(1) all the evidence available and the particular circumstances of the complaint;
(2) similarities with other complaints received by the respondent;
(3) relevant guidance published by the FSA , other relevant regulators, the Financial Ombudsman Service or former schemes; and
(4) appropriate analysis of decisions by the Financial Ombudsman Service concerning similar complaints received by the respondent.

DISP 1.4.3

handbook-guidance
The respondent should aim to resolve complaints at the earliest possible opportunity, minimising the number of unresolved complaints which need to be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 1.4.4

handbook-rule
Where a complaint against a respondent is referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service, the respondent must cooperate fully with the Financial Ombudsman Service and comply promptly with any settlements or awards made by it.

DISP 1.4.5

handbook-guidance
DISP App 2 contains guidance to respondents on the approach to assessing financial loss and appropriate redress where a respondent upholds a complaint concerning the sale of an endowment policy for the purposes of repaying a mortgage.

DISP 1.5

Complaints resolved by close of the next business day

DISP 1.5.1

handbook-rule
The following rules do not apply to a complaint that is resolved by a respondent by close of business on the business day following its receipt:
(1) the complaints time limit rules;
(2) the complaints forwarding rules;
(3) the complaints reporting rules; and
(4) the complaints record rule, if the complaint does not relate to MiFID business.

DISP 1.5.2

handbook-guidance
Complaints falling within this section are still subject to the complaint resolution rules.

DISP 1.5.3

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of this section:
(1) a complaint received on any day other than a business day, or after close of business on a business day, may be treated as received on the next business day; and
(2) a complaint is resolved where the complainant has indicated acceptance of a response from the respondent, with neither the response nor acceptance having to be in writing

DISP 1.6

Complaints time limit rules

Keeping the complainant informed

DISP 1.6.1

handbook-rule
On receipt of a complaint, a respondent must:
(1) send the complainant a prompt written acknowledgement providing early reassurance that it has received the complaint and is dealing with it; and
(2) ensure the complainant is kept informed thereafter of the progress of the measures being taken for the complaint's resolution.

Final or other response within eight weeks

DISP 1.6.2

handbook-rule
The respondent must, by the end of eight weeks after its receipt of the complaint, send the complainant:
(1) a final response; or
(2) a written response which:
(a) explains why it is not in a position to make a final response and indicates when it expects to be able to provide one;
(b) informs the complainant that he may now refer the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service; and
(c) encloses a copy of the Financial Ombudsman Service standard explanatory leaflet.

DISP 1.6.3

handbook-guidance
Respondents are not obliged to comply with the requirements in DISP 1.6.2 R where they are able to rely on any of the following rules:
(1) the complainant's written acceptance rule (DISP 1.6.4 R);
(2) the rules for respondents with two-stage complaints procedures (DISP 1.6.5 R); or
(3) the complaints forwarding rules (DISP 1.7).
  • 01/11/2007

Complainant's written acceptance

DISP 1.6.4

handbook-rule
DISP 1.6.2 R does not apply if the complainant has already indicated in writing acceptance of a response by the respondent, provided that the response informs the complainant how to pursue his complaint with the respondent if he remains dissatisfied.

Respondents with two-stage complaints procedures

DISP 1.6.5

handbook-rule
If, within eight weeks of receiving a complaint, the respondent sends the complainant a written response which:
(1) offers redress or remedial action (whether or not it accepts the complaint) or rejects the complaint and gives reasons for doing so;
(2) informs the complainant how to pursue his complaint with the respondent if he remains dissatisfied;
(3) refers to the ultimate availability of the Financial Ombudsman Service if he remains dissatisfied with the respondent's response; and
(4) indicates it will regard the complaint as closed if it does not receive a reply within eight weeks of the complainant's receipt of the response;
the respondent is not obliged to continue to comply with DISP 1.6.2 R unless the complainant indicates that he remains dissatisfied, in which case, the obligation to comply with DISP 1.6.2 R resumes.

DISP 1.6.6

handbook-rule
If the complainant takes more than a week to reply to a written response of the kind described in DISP 1.6.5 R, the additional time in excess of a week will not count for the purposes of the time limits in DISP 1.6.2 R or the complaints reporting rules.
  • 01/11/2007

Speed and quality of response

DISP 1.6.7

handbook-guidance
It is expected that within eight weeks of their receipt, almost all complaints to a respondent will have been substantively addressed by it through a final response or response as described in DISP 1.6.4 R or DISP 1.6.5 R.

DISP 1.6.8

handbook-guidance
When assessing a respondent's response to a complaint, the FSA may have regard to a number of factors, including, the quality of response, as against the complaints resolution rules, as well as the speed with which it was made.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.7

Complaints forwarding rules

DISP 1.7.1

handbook-rule
A respondent that has reasonable grounds to be satisfied that another respondent may be solely or jointly responsible for the matter alleged in a complaint may forward the complaint, or the relevant part of it, in writing to that other respondent, provided it:
(1) does so promptly;
(2) informs the complainant promptly in a final response of why the complaint has been forwarded by it to the other respondent, and of the other respondent's contact details; and
(3) where jointly responsible for the fault alleged in the complaint, it complies with its own obligations under this chapter in respect of that part of the complaint it has not forwarded.

Dealing with a forwarded complaint

DISP 1.7.2

handbook-rule
When a respondent receives a complaint that has been forwarded to it under DISP 1.7.1 R, the complaint is treated for the purposes of DISP as if made directly to that respondent, and as if received by it when the forwarded complaint was received.

DISP 1.7.3

handbook-guidance
On receiving a forwarded complaint, the standard time limits will apply from the date on which the respondent receives the forwarded complaint.

DISP 1.8

Complaints time barring rule

  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.8.1

handbook-rule
If a respondent receives a complaint which is outside the time limits for referral to the Financial Ombudsman Service (see DISP 2.3) it may reject the complaint without considering the merits, but must explain this to the complainant in a final response in accordance with DISP 1.6.2 R and indicate that the Ombudsman may waive the time limits in exceptional circumstances.

DISP 1.9

Complaints record rule

  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.9.1

handbook-rule
A firm, including, in the case of MiFID business, a branch of a UK firm in another EEA state, must keep a record of each complaint received and the measures taken for its resolution, and retain that record for:
(1) at least five years where the complaint relates to MiFID business; and
(2) three years for all other complaints;
from the date the complaint was received.
[Note: article 10 of the MiFID implementing Directive]

DISP 1.10

Complaints reporting rules

  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.10.1

handbook-rule
Twice a year a firm must provide the FSA with a complete report concerning complaints received from eligible complainants. The report must be set out in the format in DISP 1 Annex 1.
  • 01/11/2007

Joint reports

DISP 1.10.1A

handbook-rule
[Text to follow]

DISP 1.10.1B

handbook-guidance
[Text to follow]

DISP 1.10.1C

handbook-rule
Firms that are part of a group may submit a joint report to the FSA . The joint report must contain the information required from all firms concerned and clearly indicate the firms on whose behalf the report is submitted. The requirement to provide a report, and the responsibility for the report, remains with each firm in the group.
  • 14/12/2007

DISP 1.10.1D

handbook-guidance
Not all the firms in the group need to submit the report jointly. Firms should only consider submitting a joint report if it is logical to do so, for example, where the firms have a common central complaints handling team and the same accounting reference date.
  • 14/12/2007

DISP 1.10.2

handbook-rule
DISP 1 Annex 1 requires (for the relevant reporting period) information about:
(1) the total number of complaints received by the firm, broken down according to the categories and generic product types described in DISP 1 Annex 1 which are relevant to the firm;
(2) the total number of complaints closed by the firm:
(a) within four weeks or less of receipt;
(b) within four to eight weeks of receipt; and
(c) more than eight weeks after receipt;
(3) the total number of complaints:
(a) upheld by the firm in the reporting period;
(b) that the firm knows have been referred to, and accepted by, the Financial Ombudsman Service in the reporting period;
(c) outstanding at the beginning of the reporting period; and
(d) outstanding at the end of the reporting period; and
(4) the total amount of redress paid in respect of complaints during the reporting period.

DISP 1.10.3

handbook-guidance
For the purpose of DISP 1.10.2 R, when completing the return, the firm should take into account the following matters.
(1) If a complaint could fall into more than one category, the complaint should be recorded in the category which the firm considers to form the main part of the complaint.
(2) Under DISP 1.10.2R (3)(a), a firm should report any complaint to which it has given a final response which upholds the complaint, even if any redress offered is disputed by the complainant. Where a complaint is upheld in part, a firm should treat the whole complaint as upheld for reporting purposes. However, where a firm rejects a complaint, yet chooses to make a goodwill payment to the complainant, the complaint should be recorded as 'rejected'.
(3) If a firm reports on the amount of redress paid under DISP 1.10.2R (4), redress should be interpreted to include an amount paid, or cost borne, by the firm, where a cash value can be readily identified, and should include:
(a) amounts paid for distress and inconvenience;
(b) a free transfer out to another provider which transfer would normally be paid for;
(c) goodwill payments and goodwill gestures;
(d) interest on delayed settlements;
(e) waiver of an excess on an insurance policy; and
(f) payments to put the consumer back into the position the consumer should have been in had the act or omission not occurred.
(4) If a firm reports on the amount of redress paid under DISP 1.10.2R (4), the redress should not, however, include repayments or refunds of premiums which had been taken in error (for example where a firm had been taking, by direct debit, twice the actual premium amount due under a policy). The refund of the overcharge would not count as redress.

DISP 1.10.4

handbook-rule
The relevant reporting periods are:
(1) the six months immediately following a firm's accounting reference date; and
(2) the six months immediately preceding a firm's accounting reference date.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.10.5

handbook-rule
Reports are to be submitted to the FSA within 30 business days of the end of the relevant reporting periods through, and in the electronic format specified in, the FSA Complaints Reporting System or the appropriate section of the FSA website.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.10.6

handbook-rule
If a firm is unable to submit a report in electronic format because of a systems failure of any kind, the firm must notify the FSA , in writing and without delay, of that systems failure.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.10.7

handbook-rule
A closed complaint is a complaint where:
(1) the firm has sent a final response; or
(2) the complainant has indicated in writing acceptance of the firm's earlier response under DISP 1.6.4 R; or
(3) for a firm which operates a two-stage complaints procedure, the complainant has not indicated that he remains dissatisfied within eight weeks of the response sent by the firm under DISP 1.6.5 R.

DISP 1.10.8

handbook-guidance
If a complaint is reported as closed under DISP 1.10.2R (2) because the complainant has not replied to the firm within eight weeks of a written response which meets the requirements in DISP 1.6.5 R, the firm may treat the date of that response as the date when the complaint was closed for the purposes of the reporting requirements in DISP 1.10.2R (2).
  • 01/11/2007

Notification of contact point for complainants

DISP 1.10.9

handbook-rule
For the purpose of inclusion in the public record maintained by the FSA, a firm must:
(1) provide the FSA, at the time of its authorisation, with details of a single contact point within the firm for complainants; and
(2) notify the FSA of any subsequent change in those details when convenient and, at the latest, in the firm's next report under the complaints reporting rules.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11

The Society of Lloyd's

  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.1

handbook-rule
The Society must establish and maintain appropriate and effective procedures for handling complaints by policyholders against members of the Society which comply with this chapter.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.2

handbook-rule
A member of the Society must, in complying with this chapter, ensure that the arrangements which the member maintains are compatible with the Lloyd's complaint procedures, so that, taken as a whole, the requirements of this sourcebook are met.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.3

handbook-rule
The Society must take reasonable steps to ensure that complaints by policyholders against members of the Society are dealt with under the Lloyd's complaint procedures and that members comply with the requirements of those procedures.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.4

handbook-rule
A complaint by a policyholder against a member of the Society may not be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service until after the Lloyd's complaint procedures have been completed or until after the end of eight weeks from receipt of the complaint, whichever is the earlier.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.5

handbook-rule
(1) A notification claiming exemption under DISP 1.1.12 R from the complaints reporting rules and the rules relating to the funding of the Financial Ombudsman Service must be given to the FSA by the Society on behalf of any member eligible for an exemption.
(2) The Society must notify the FSA if the conditions relating to such an exemption no longer apply to a member who is exempt.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.6

handbook-rule
The report to be sent to the FSA under the complaints reporting rules must be provided by the Society and must cover all complaints by policyholders against members falling within the scope of the complaints reporting rules.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.7

handbook-guidance
Each member of the Society is individually subject to the rules in this chapter as a result of the insurance market direction given in DISP 2.5.4 G under section 316 of the Act (Direction by Authority).
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.8

handbook-guidance
However, the Society operates a two-tier internal complaints handling procedure, currently set out in the "Code for Underwriting agents: UK Personal Lines Claims and Complaints Handling". Under this procedure, complaints by policyholders against members of the Society are considered by the managing agent and then, if necessary, by the Society's in-house Complaints Department. This procedure (and any procedure that may replace it) will be subject to the requirements in this chapter.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.9

handbook-guidance
Members will individually comply with this chapter if and only if all complaints by policyholders against members are dealt with under the Lloyd's complaints procedures. Accordingly, certain of the obligations under this chapter, for example the obligation to report on complaints received and the obligation to pay fees under the rules relating to the funding of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FEES 5), must be complied with by the Society on behalf of members. Managing agents will not have to make a separate report to the FSA on complaints reported under the complaints reporting rules sent by the Society.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.10

handbook-rule
A members' adviser must establish and maintain effective arrangements for handling any complaint from a member of the Society regarding advice given to the member in connection with the acquiring or disposing of syndicate participation.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.11

handbook-guidance
Complaints from members of the Society regarding the activities of members' advisers, which cannot be resolved by the members' adviser, cannot be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.12

handbook-guidance
The Financial Ombudsman Service is not able to deal with the complaints listed in DISP 1.11.13 R and separate rules and guidance are therefore required.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.13

handbook-rule
The Society must establish and maintain appropriate and effective arrangements for handling any complaint from a member or a former member about:
(1) regulated activities carried on by the Society;
(2) the Society's regulatory functions carried on by the Society, the Council or those to whom the Council delegates authority to carry out such functions;
(3) advice given by an underwriting agent to a person to become, continue or cease to be, a member of a particular syndicate; and
(4) the management by a managing agent of the underwriting capacity of a syndicate on which the complainant participates or has participated.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.14

handbook-rule
The Society must maintain by byelaw one or more appropriate effective schemes for the resolution of disputes between an individual member or a former member who was an individual member and:
(1) his underwriting agent; or
(2) the Society.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.15

handbook-rule
For the purposes of DISP 1.11.13 R "individual member" includes a member which is a limited liability partnership or a body corporate whose members consist only of, or of the nominees for, a single natural person or a group of connected persons.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.16

handbook-guidance
The schemes to which DISP 1.11.13 R currently refers are the Lloyd's Arbitration Scheme and the Lloyd's Members' Ombudsman respectively, but the Society may maintain other independent dispute resolution schemes in addition to, or instead of, either of these schemes.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.17

handbook-guidance
The schemes referred to in DISP 1.11.13 R should be operationally independent of the Society.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.18

handbook-guidance
An individual member or former member who was an individual member should not have access to the schemes referred to in DISP 1.11.13 R unless the complaints arrangements maintained by the Society have failed to resolve the complaint to his satisfaction within eight weeks of receiving it.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.19

handbook-guidance
The Society should give the FSA adequate notice of all proposed changes to the byelaws relating to the schemes referred to in DISP 1.11.13 R.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.20

handbook-guidance
When considering what is required to ensure the operational independence of the schemes referred to in DISP 1.11.13 R, or proposed changes in such schemes, the Society should take account of similar arrangements operated by the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1.11.21

handbook-rule
A contravention of DISP 1.11.13 R or DISP 1.11.14 R does not give rise to a right of action by a private person under section 150 of the Act (Actions for damages) and each of those rules is specified under section 150(2) of the Act as a provision giving rise to no such right of action.
  • 01/11/2007

DISP 1 Annex 1

Complaints return form

  • 01/12/2004

handbook-rule
Complaints return form

This annex consists only of one or more forms. Forms are to be found through the following address:



Complaints return form - DISP 1 Annex 1 R

DISP 1 Annex 2

handbook-guidance

Export chapter as

DISP 2

Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 2.1

Application and Purpose

Application

DISP 2.1.1

handbook-rule
This chapter applies to the Ombudsman, to firms (except UCITS qualifiers), to licensees and to VJ participants.

DISP 2.1.2

handbook-guidance
It is also relevant to those who might wish to refer a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
(2) relevant new complaints about events before commencement but referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service after commencement under the Ombudsman Transitional Order; and
(3) relevant transitional complaints referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service after the relevant commencement date under the Mortgages and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order.

DISP 2.1.3

handbook-rule
A reference in this chapter to a "complaint":
(1) includes part of a complaint; and
(2) under the Compulsory Jurisdiction includes all or part of a relevant new complaint and all or part of a relevant transitional complaint.

DISP 2.1.4

handbook-guidance
References in this chapter to "firms" are to be construed, where relevant, as including:
(1) in accordance with the Ombudsman Transitional Order, unauthorised persons subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints; and
(2) as a result of section 226 of the Act, unauthorised persons who were formerly firms in respect of complaints about acts or omissions which occurred at the time when they were authorised, provided that the Compulsory Jurisdiction rules were in force in relation to the activity in question; and
(3) members of the Society of Lloyd's (see DISP 2.5.3 G).

DISP 2.1.4A

handbook-guidance
References in this chapter to licensees are to be construed, where relevant, as a result of section 226A of the Act, as including persons who were formerly licensees in respect of complaints about acts or omissions which occurred at the time when they were licensees, provided the complaint falls within a description specified in the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction rules in force at the time of the act or omission.
  • 06/04/2007

Purpose

DISP 2.1.5

handbook-guidance
The purpose of this chapter is to set out the rules which govern the scope of both the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction and the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. They specify who may refer a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service and the time limits for doing so. They also set out which activities are covered by the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdictionand the Voluntary Jurisdiction and the territorial scope of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 2.2

Which complaints can be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service?

  • 01/12/2004

Complaints (other than relevant new complaints or relevant transitional complaints)

DISP 2.2.1

handbook-guidance
The following conditions will need to be satisfied before a complaint (other than a relevant new complaint or relevant transitional complaint) can be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service:
(1) the complainant must be an eligible complainant (see DISP 2.4);
(2) the firm, licensee or VJ participant about which the complaint is made must be one which is subject to either the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction or the Voluntary Jurisdiction, as appropriate;
(3) the activity to which the complaint relates must be subject to either the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction or the Voluntary Jurisdiction, as appropriate;
(4) in relation to the Compulsory Jurisdiction and the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction, the act or omission complained of must have occurred at a time when the rules in DISP 2 were in force, in relation to the activity being complained about;
(5) the firm, licensee or VJ participant must have failed to resolve the complaint to the satisfaction of the complainant within eight weeks of receiving it; and
(6) the firm, licensee or VJ participant about which the complaint is made must:
(a) in the case of the Compulsory Jurisdiction, have been authorised under the Act at the time of the act or omission to which the complaint relates; or
(b) in the case of the Voluntary Jurisdiction, have been a VJ participant at the time of the act or omission to which the complaint relates or have agreed to let the Financial Ombudsman Service consider such complaints, and must not have withdrawn from being a VJ participant at the time when the complaint is referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service; or
(c) in the case of the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction, have been a licensee at the time of the act or omission to which the complaint relates.

Relevant new complaints

DISP 2.2.2

handbook-guidance
(1) Article 3 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order provides that (subject to certain modifications) the Compulsory Jurisdiction applies to a relevant new complaint, provided that:
(a) the act or omission is that of a person who was, immediately before commencement, subject to a former scheme;
(b) the act or omission occurred in the carrying on by that person of an activity to which that former scheme applied; and
(c) the complainant is eligible and wishes to have the complaint dealt with under the new scheme.
(2) For the purposes of (1)(c), the Ombudsman Transitional Order enables the Ombudsman, if he considers it appropriate, to treat the complainant as eligible if he would have been entitled to refer an equivalent complaint to the former scheme in question immediately before commencement.
(3) The Ombudsman Transitional Order enables relevant new complaints to be handled, as far as possible, under the Financial Ombudsman Service procedures, but provides for the rules of the former schemes to apply or be taken into account in certain circumstances.
(4) The Ombudsman Transitional Order makes separate provision for the treatment of relevant existing complaints, as described in DISP App 1
  • 01/04/2002

Relevant transitional complaints

DISP 2.2.2A

handbook-guidance
(1) Article 2 of the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order provides that (subject to certain modifications) the Compulsory Jurisdiction applies to a relevant transitional complaint, provided that:
(a) the act or omission is that of a person ("R") who, at the time of that act or omission, was subject to a former scheme;
(b) R was an authorised person on or after the relevant commencement date;
(c) the act or omission occurred in the carrying on by R of an activity to which that former scheme applied; and
(d) the complainant is eligible and wishes to have the complaint dealt with under the new scheme.
(2) For the purposes of (1)(d), the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order enables the Ombudsman, if he considers it appropriate, to treat the complainant as eligible if he would have been entitled to refer an equivalent complaint to the former scheme in question immediately before the relevant commencement date.
(3) The Mortgage and General Insurance Transitional Order enables relevant transitional complaints to be handled, so far as possible, under the Financial Ombudsman Service procedures, but provides for the rules of the former schemes to apply or be taken into account in certain circumstances.
  • 31/10/2004

Dismissal of complaints without consideration of the merits

DISP 2.2.3

handbook-guidance
Under DISP 3.3.1 R, the Ombudsman may dismiss a complaint without considering its merits if he is satisfied that the complainant has not suffered, or is unlikely to suffer, financial loss, material distress or material inconvenience.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.3

Time Limits for referral of complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 2.3.1

handbook-rule
(1) The Ombudsman cannot consider a complaint (except as described in (2)) if the complainant refers it to the Financial Ombudsman Service:
(a) less than eight weeks after receipt of the complaint by the firm, licensee or VJ participant, unless the firm, licensee or VJ participant has already sent the complainant its final response; or
(b) more than six months after the date on which the firm, licensee or VJ participant sends the complainant its final response advising him that he may refer his complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service; or
(c) more than six years after the event complained of or (if later) more than three years from the date on which he became aware (or ought reasonably to have become aware) that he had cause for complaint, unless he has referred the complaint to the firm, licensee or VJ participant or to the Ombudsman within that period and has a written acknowledgement or some other record of the complaint having been received (but see DISP 2.3.5 G - DISP 2.3.6 R).
(2) The Ombudsman can consider complaints outside the time limits in (1)(b) or (c) or in DISP 2.3.6 R when, in his view, the failure to comply with the time limits was as a result of exceptional circumstances or where he is required to do so by the Ombudsman Transitional Order (see DISP 2.3.2 G) or where the firm, licensee or VJ participant has not objected to the Ombudsman considering the complaint.

DISP 2.3.1A

handbook-guidance
If the complaint relates to the sale of an endowment policy for the purpose of achieving capital repayment of a mortgage, the receipt by the complainant of a letter which states that there is a risk (rather than a high risk) that the policy would not, at maturity, produce a sum large enough to repay the target amount is not, itself, sufficient to cause the three year time period in DISP 2.3.1 R (1)(c) to start to run.
  • 01/02/2003

DISP 2.3.2

handbook-guidance
In relation to DISP 2.3.1 R (1)(b) and (c), article 4(2) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order requires an Ombudsman to extend the time limit in respect of a relevant new complaint referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service not later than twelve months after commencement, so the time limit applying to the complaint is the same as that which would have applied under the former scheme in question as it had effect immediately before commencement.

DISP 2.3.3

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of DISP 2.3.1 R (2), an example of an exceptional circumstance might be where the complainant has been or is incapacitated or where the firm, licensee or VJ participant has failed, in its final response, to inform the complainant that he may refer his complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service or that he must do so within six months.

DISP 2.3.4

handbook-guidance
Under FEES 5.5.1 R a firm, licensee or VJ participant is liable to pay a case fee in respect of chargeable cases. However, in some circumstances, the Ombudsman may conclude that a firm, licensee or VJ participant should have more time to resolve a complaint before a case fee is incurred (for example, where there has been delay in obtaining information from third parties or where the Ombudsman considers that the complainant has not fully cooperated with the firm, licensee or VJ participant in the investigation of the complaint).

Exceptions for reviews of past business

DISP 2.3.5

handbook-rule
DISP 2.3.1 R (1)(c) does not apply where:
(1) the time limit has been extended under a scheme for review of past business approved by the Treasury under section 404 of the Act (Schemes for reviewing past business); or
(2) the complaint concerns a contract or policy which is the subject of a review directly or indirectly under:
(a) the terms of the Statement of Policy on 'Pension transfers and Opt-outs' issued by the FSA on 25 October 1994; or
(b) the terms of the policy statement for the review of specific categories of FSAVC business issued by the FSA on 28 February 2000.

Exceptions for certain mortgage endowment complaints

DISP 2.3.6

handbook-rule
(1) If a complaint relates to the sale of an endowment policy for the purpose of achieving capital repayment of a mortgage and the complainant receives a letter from a firm or a VJ participant warning that there is a high risk that the policy will not, at maturity, produce a sum large enough to repay the target amount then, subject to (2), (3), (4) and (5):
(a) time for referring a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service starts to run from the date the complainant receives the letter; and
(b) ends three years from that date ("the final date").
(2) Paragraph (1)(b) applies only if the complainant also receives within the three year period mentioned in (1)(b) and at least six months before the final date an explanation that the complainant's time to refer such a complaint would expire at the final date.
(3) If an explanation is given but is sent outside the period referred to in (2), time for referring a complaint will run until a date specified in such an explanation which must not be less than six months after the date on which the notice is sent.
(4) A complainant will be taken to have complied with the time limits in (1) to (3) above if in any case he refers the complaint to the firm or VJ participant within those limits and has a written acknowledgement or some other record of the complaint having been received.
(5) Paragraph (1) does not apply if the Ombudsman is of the opinion that, in the circumstances of the case, it is appropriate for DISP 2.3.1 R(1)(c) to apply.
  • 01/06/2004

DISP 2.4

Who can refer a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service?

DISP 2.4.1

handbook-rule
A complaint may be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service only if it is brought by or on behalf of an eligible complainant.

DISP 2.4.2

handbook-guidance
Eligible complainants are those falling within one of the classes of person specified in DISP 2.4.3 R; and
(1) having a customer or potential customer relationship with a firm, licensee or VJ participant (as specified in DISP 2.4.7 R and DISP 2.4.8 R); or
(2) having an indirect relationship with a firm, licensee or VJ participant (as specified in DISP 2.4.10 R);
or, in relation to relevant complaints, those specified in the Ombudsman Transitional Order or the Mortgages and General Insurance Transitional Order (see DISP 2.4.14 G, DISP 2.4.15 G, and DISP App 1.3.1 G).

Classes of person

DISP 2.4.3

handbook-rule
(1) Subject to (2), a person is an eligible complainant if he is:
(a) a private individual; or
(b) a business, which has a group annual turnover of less than £1 million at the time the complainant refers the complaint to the firm, licensee or VJ participant; or
(c) a charity which has an annual income of less than £1 million at the time the complainant refers the complaint to the firm, licensee or VJ participant; or
(d) a trustee of a trust which has a net asset value of less than £1 million at the time the complainant refers the complaint to the firm, licensee or VJ participant;
who satisfies the relevant criteria in DISP 2.4.7 R - DISP 2.4.12 R, and is not within (2).
(2) The following are not eligible complainants:
(a) (in the Compulsory Jurisdiction), an individual, business, charity or trustee (of a trust which is not a pension scheme trust falling under (1)(d) above), who was a professional client or eligible counterparty in relation to the firm in question at the time of the act or omission, and in respect of the activity, which is the subject of the complaint ;
(aa) (in the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction), a company , a partnership consisting of more than three persons, a partnership all of whose members are companies or an unincorporated body which consists entirely of companies;
(b) (in the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction and the Voluntary Jurisdiction),a firm, licensee or VJ participant whose complaint relates in any way to an activity which the firm itself has permission to carry on or which the licensee or VJ participant itself conducts, and which is subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction, the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction or the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 2.4.4

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of DISP 2, a business includes a sole trader, a company, an unincorporated body and a partnership carrying on any trade or profession. But, in the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction, eligible complainant excludes a company, a partnership consisting of more than three persons, a partnership all of whose members are companies and an unincorporated body which consists entirely of companies (see DISP 2.4.3 R (2)(aa)).

DISP 2.4.5

handbook-guidance
If a firm, licensee or VJ participant is in any doubt about the eligibility of a business, charity or trust, it should treat the complainant as if it were eligible. If the complaint is referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service, the Ombudsman will determine eligibility by reference to appropriate evidence, such as audited accounts or VAT returns.

DISP 2.4.6

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of DISP 2.4.3 R(1)(b), a subsidiary of a corporate group (as defined in section 262(1) of the Companies Act 1985) will be eligible only where the corporate group as a whole meets the turnover test.
  • 01/04/2002

Eligible complainants: customers

DISP 2.4.7

handbook-rule
A person is an eligible complainant if:
(1) he is or has been a customer of a firm, licensee or VJ participant;
(2) the complaint arises out of matters relevant to his being or having been a customer of the firm, licensee or VJ participant; and
(3) he falls into one of the classes of person in DISP 2.4.3 R(1).

Eligible complainants: potential customers

DISP 2.4.8

handbook-rule
A person is an eligible complainant if:
(1) the complaint arises out of a firm's, licensee's or VJ participant's actions or failure to act for the complainant in his capacity as a potential customer of the firm, licensee or VJ participant; and
(2) he falls into one of the classes of person in DISP 2.4.3 R(1).

DISP 2.4.9

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.4.8 R is intended to enable a potential customer to use the Financial Ombudsman Service where the complaint involves an allegation that he has suffered or may suffer financial loss, material distress or material inconvenience as a result of a firm's, licensee's or VJ participant's wrongful act or omission (for example, where, as a result of maladministration or illegal discrimination, a service has not been provided). A complaint about the legitimate exercise of a firm's, licensee's or VJ participant's commercial judgment may be dismissed by an Ombudsman without consideration of its merits under DISP 3.3.1 R(11).

Eligible complainants: indirect complaints

DISP 2.4.10

handbook-rule
A person is an eligible complainant if:
(1) he is not, and has not been, a customer or potential customer of the firm, licensee or VJ participant in relation to the subject matter of the complaint; and
(2) he has a complaint against the firm, licensee or VJ participant which either:
(a) arises out of a relationship which he has with the firm, licensee or VJ participant as described in DISP 2.4.11 R or DISP 2.4.12 R (4); or
(b) is derived from another person and which arises from any of the circumstances described in DISP 2.4.12 R; and
(3) he falls into one of the classes of persons in DISP 2.4.3 R(1).

DISP 2.4.11

handbook-rule
The relationships with the firm, licensee or VJ participant relevant for DISP 2.4.10 R(2)(a) are:
(1) the complainant has given the firm, licensee or VJ participant a guarantee or security for a mortgage , loan, actual or prospective regulated consumer credit agreement or actual or prospective regulated consumer hire agreement, or any linked transaction as defined in the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended); or
(2) the complainant has relied in the course of his business on a cheque guarantee card issued by the firm or VJ participant; or
(3) the complainant is the true owner or the person entitled to immediate possession of a cheque or other bill of exchange, or of the funds it represents, collected by the firm or VJ participant for someone elses account; or
(4) the complainant is the recipient of a banker's reference given by the firm or VJ participant; or
(5) the complainant is the holder of units in a collective investment scheme and the firm or VJ participant is the operator or depositary of the scheme; or
(6) the complainant is a person about whom information relevant to his financial standing is or was held by the firm, licensee or VJ participant in operating a credit reference agency as defined by section 145(8) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended); or
(7) the complainant is a person from whom the firm, licensee or VJ participant has sought to recover payment under a regulated consumer credit agreement or regulated consumer hire agreement in carrying on debt-collecting as defined by section 145 (7) of the Consumer Credit Act (1974) (as amended).

DISP 2.4.12

handbook-rule
The circumstances relevant for DISP 2.4.10 R(2)(b) are:
(1) that the complainant is a beneficiary under a trust or estate of which the firm or VJ participant is trustee or personal representative; or
(2) that the complainant is a person for whose benefit a contract of insurance was taken out or was intended to be taken out; or
(3) that the complainant is a person on whom the legal right to benefit from a claim under a contract of insurance has been devolved by contract, statute or subrogation or;
(4) that the complainant is the beneficial owner of units in a collective investment scheme, and the firm or the VJ participant is the operator or depositary of the scheme; or
(5) that the complainant is a beneficiary of, or has a beneficial interest in, a personal pension scheme or stakeholder pension scheme.

DISP 2.4.12A

handbook-rule
In respect of a complaint under the Voluntary Jurisdiction relating to National Savings and Investments' business under DISP 2.6.9 R (9), where the complainant is not otherwise eligible in accordance with DISP 2.4, the Ombudsman may, nonetheless, if he considers it appropriate, treat the complainant as an eligible complainant, if he or she should have been entitled to refer an equivalent complainant to the Adjudicator for National Savings or, as the case may be, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration immediately before the Voluntary Jurisdiction began to cover National Savings and Investments' business, provided that the complainant wishes to have the complaint dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/12/2004

DISP 2.4.13

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.4.12 R(2) and(3) include, for example, employees covered by a group permanent health policy taken out by an employer, which provides in the insurance contract that the policy was taken out for the benefit of the employee. They do not include, for example, complaints about the actions of the insurer of the other driver in a car accident,
  • 01/09/2003

DISP 2.4.14

handbook-guidance
In respect of a relevant new complaint or a relevant transitional complaint, where the complainant is not eligible in accordance with DISP 2.4, article 3(3) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order and article 2(3) of the Mortgages and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order provides that the Ombudsman may, nonetheless, if he considers it appropriate, treat the complainant as an eligible complainant if he or she would have been entitled to refer an equivalent complaint to the former scheme in question immediately before commencement, provided that the complainant wishes to have the complaint dealt with under the new scheme.
  • 31/10/2004

DISP 2.4.15

handbook-guidance
Article 3(4) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order provides that, in the case of a relevant new complaint, where the former scheme in question is the Insurance Ombudsman Scheme, a complainant is not to be treated as an eligible complainant unless:
(1) he is an individual; and
(2) the complaint does not concern aspects of a policy relating to a business or trade carried on by him.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.4.15A

handbook-guidance
Article 2(4) of the Mortgages and General Insurance Transitional Order provides that, in the case of a relevant transitional complaint, where the former scheme in question is the GISC facility, a complainant is not to be treated as an eligible complainant unless:
(1) he is an individual; and
(2) he is acting otherwise than solely for the purposes of his business.
  • 31/10/2004

DISP 2.4.15B

handbook-guidance
Article 2(5) of the Mortgages and General Insurance Transitional Order provides that, in the case of a relevant transitional complaint, where the former scheme in question is the MCAS scheme, a complainant is not to be treated as an eligible complainant if:
(1) the complaint does not relate to a breach of the Mortgage Code published by the Council of Mortgage Lenders;
(2) the complaint concerns physical injury, illness, nervous shock or their consequences; or
(3) the complainant is claiming a sum of money that exceeds £100,000.
  • 31/10/2004

Representatives of eligible complainants

DISP 2.4.16

handbook-rule
A complaint may be brought on behalf of an eligible complainant, or a deceased person who would have been an eligible complainant, by a person authorised by the eligible complainant or authorised by law.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.4.17

handbook-rule
It is immaterial whether the person authorised to act on behalf of an eligible complainant under DISP 2.4.16 R:
(1) can satisfy any of the criteria applicable to the person under DISP 2.4.3 R(1); or
(2) has a claim of his own, or is acting for another person against the firm, licensee or VJ participant; or
(3) is or was a customer or potential customer of the firm, licensee or VJ participant.

DISP 2.5

Which firms are subject to the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service?

Firms and VJ participants

DISP 2.5.1

handbook-guidance
All firms are subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. VJ participants are subject to the Voluntary Jurisdiction and to DISP 2 to the extent specified in the standard terms (DISP 4). Licensees are subject to the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction.

DISP 2.5.2

handbook-guidance
Firms may, however, be exempt from the requirements of DISP 1 (Treating complainants fairly) and FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service funding), if they qualify under DISP 1.1.12 R (Exemption).

Members of the Society of Lloyd's

DISP 2.5.3

handbook-guidance
The insurance market direction given in DISP 2.5.4 D is given under section 316(1) of the Act (Direction by Authority) and applies to members of the Society of Lloyd's.

DISP 2.5.4

handbook-guidance
(1) With effect from commencement, Part XVI of the Act (The Ombudsman Scheme), and in particular section 226 (Compulsory jurisdiction), applies to the carrying on of insurance business by members.
(2) For the purposes of (1) 'insurance business' means the regulated activities of effecting or carrying out contracts of insurance written at Lloyd's.

DISP 2.6

To which activities do the rules apply?

The Compulsory Jurisdiction

DISP 2.6.1

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman can consider a complaint under the Compulsory Jurisdiction only if it relates to an act or omission by a firm in the carrying on of one or more of the following activities (unless the provision described in DISP 2.6.3 R applies):
(1) regulated activities;
(2) lending money secured by a charge on land;
(3) lending money (other than restricted credit);
(4) paying money by a plastic card (other than a store card);
(5) the provision of ancillary banking services (see DISP 2.6.6 G);
(6) consumer credit activities;
or activities ancillary to them (see DISP 2.6.2 G).

DISP 2.6.2

handbook-rule
The activities in DISP 2.6.1 R include any ancillary activities, including advice, provided by the firm in connection with those activities.

DISP 2.6.3

handbook-guidance
Under article 3 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order, the Ombudsman can also consider a relevant new complaint under the Compulsory Jurisdiction where it relates to an act or omission of a firm which was, immediately before commencement, subject to a former scheme, provided that:
(1) the act or omission occurred in the carrying on by that firm of an activity to which that former scheme applied; and
(2) the complainant is eligible and wishes to have the complaint dealt with under the new scheme.

DISP 2.6.3A

handbook-guidance
Under article 2 of the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order, the Ombudsman can also consider a relevant transitional complaint under the Compulsory Jurisdiction where it relates to an act or omission of a firm which was, immediately before the relevant commencement date, subject to a former scheme, provided that:
(1) the act or omission occurred in the carrying on by that firm of an activity to which that former scheme applied; and
(2) the complainant is eligible and wishes to have the complaint dealt with under the new scheme.
  • 31/10/2004

DISP 2.6.4

handbook-guidance
The carrying on of an activity in DISP 2.6.1 R includes offering, providing or failing to provide and administering or failing to administer a service in relation to the activities covered by that rule. This includes the manner in which a firm has administered its business, provided that the business is an activity subject to the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 2.6.5

handbook-guidance
Complaints about acts or omissions by a firm include complaints about acts or omissions in respect of activities for which the firm is responsible (including business of any appointed representative for which the firm has accepted responsibility).

DISP 2.6.6

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of DISP 2.6.1 R (5), ancillary banking services include, for example, the provision and operation of cash machines and safe deposit boxes and the provision of account aggregation services (that is, services where details from several accounts which may be held by different financial service providers can be accessed by a single password).
  • 01/09/2003

DISP 2.6.7

handbook-rule
A complaint about an authorised professional firm cannot be handled under the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service if it relates solely to a non-mainstream regulated activity and can be handled by a designated professional body.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.6.8

handbook-guidance
A complaint about a non-mainstream regulated activity conducted by an authorised professional firm will be handled by the relevant professional body.
  • 01/04/2002

The Consumer Credit Jurisdiction

DISP 2.6.8A

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman can consider a complaint under the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction only if it is not covered by the Compulsory Jurisdiction and it relates to an act or omission by a licensee in the carrying on of one or more of the following activities:

consumer credit activities or activities ancillary to them.
  • 06/04/2007

DISP 2.6.8B

handbook-rule
The activities in DISP 2.6.8A R include any ancillary activities, including advice, provided by the licensee in connection with those activities.
  • 06/04/2007

DISP 2.6.8C

handbook-guidance
The carrying on of an activity in DISP 2.6.8A R includes offering, providing or failing to provide and administering or failing to administer a service in relation to the activities covered by that rule. This includes the manner in which a licensee has administered its business, provided that the business is an activity subject to the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 06/04/2007

The Voluntary Jurisdiction

DISP 2.6.9

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman can consider a complaint under the Voluntary Jurisdiction only if it is not covered by the Compulsory Jurisdictionor the Consumer Credit Jurisdictionand it relates to an act or omission in the carrying on of one or more of the following activities by a VJ participant:
(1) general insurance business;
(2) accepting deposits;
(3) lending money secured by a charge over land;
(4) lending money (other than restricted credit);
(5) paying money by a plastic card (other than a store card);
(6) the provision of ancillary banking services;
(6A) acting as an intermediary for a loan secured by a charge over land;
(6B) acting as an intermediary for general insurance business or long-term insurance business;
(6C) activities which would be consumer credit activities if they were carried on from an establishment in the United Kingdom;
(7) a financial services activity carried on after commencement and which had been covered by a former scheme in so far as the VJ participant was a member of that former scheme, in respect of that activity, immediately before the commencement day;
(8) an activity carried on on or after 29 April 1988 which was a regulated activity when the VJ participant joined the Voluntary Jurisdiction (or became an authorised person if later) but which was not a regulated activity at the time of the act or omission;
(9) National Savings and Investments' business;
or activities ancillary to them (see DISP 2.6.11 R).

DISP 2.6.9A

handbook-guidance
A complaint may be covered by the Voluntary Jurisdiction under one or more of the subparagraphs of DISP 2.6.9 R
  • 01/12/2004

Acting as an intermediary for a loan secured by a charge over land

DISP 2.6.9B

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.6.9 R (6A)includes:
(1) making arrangements for a borrower or potential borrower to enter into, or vary the terms of, a loan secured by a charge over land;
(2) making arrangements with a view to a borrower or potential borrower who participates in the arrangements entering into a loan secured over land; and
(3) advising a borrower or potential borrower on the merits of entering into, or varying the terms of, a loan secured by a charge over land.
  • 01/12/2004

DISP 2.6.9C

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.6.9 R (6B)includes:
(1) introducing, proposing or carrying out other work preparatory to the conclusion of contracts of general insurance business or long-term insurance business or reinsurance;
(2) concluding such contracts;
(3) assisting in the administration and performance of such contracts, in particular in the event of a claim;
(4) dealing as an agent, or arranging deals, in such contracts (or rights in them);
(5) managing, safeguarding or administering assets consisting of, or including, such contracts (or rights in them); and
(6) advising on the merits of buying, selling, subscribing for or underwriting such contracts (or rights in them).
But customers of reinsurance intermediaries are unlikely to be eligible complainants.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.6.10

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.6.9 R (7) enables complaints about VJ participants which, immediately before the commencement day, were members of one of the former schemes replaced by the Financial Ombudsman Service to be dealt with under the Voluntary Jurisdiction. This is in respect of the financial services activities for which the VJ participant was previously covered but excludes complaints which fall into the Compulsory Jurisdiction as relevant complaints. So the complaints which are covered by DISP 2.6.9 R (7) are only those which arise out of acts or omissions occurring after the commencement day.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.6.10A

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.6.9 R (6) includes the activities referred to in DISP 2.6.6 G.
  • 01/12/2004

DISP 2.6.10B

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.6.9 R (8)enables a firm that is subject to the compulsory jurisdiction for regulated activities to become a VJ participant in order to cover complaints about earlier events relating to those activities before they became regulated activities.
  • 01/12/2004

DISP 2.6.11

handbook-rule
The activities in DISP 2.6.9 R include any ancillary activities, including advice and any ancillary long-term insurance, provided by the VJ participant in connection with those activities.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.6.12

handbook-rule
A complaint subject to these rules which is not covered by the Compulsory Jurisdiction or the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction can be considered by the Ombudsman even though it relates to an act or omission that occurred before the VJ participant was participating in the Financial Ombudsman Service, and whether the act or omission occurred before or after the commencement day, either:
(1) if the complaint could have been dealt with under a former scheme; or
(2) as a consequence of the agreement of the VJ participant in DISP 4.2.5 R.

DISP 2.6.13

handbook-guidance
The provisions of DISP 2.6.12 R are made under the power in sections 227(13) and 227(14) of the Act. Those sections allow for a complaint relating to an act or omission occurring either before commencement or before the VJ participant joined the Voluntary Jurisdiction (or both) to be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service. Under section 227(13), the act or omission must be one which could have been dealt with under a former scheme. Under section 227(14), the VJ participant must agree; but that agreement is provided by DISP 2.6.12 R (2)and DISP 4.2.5 R. Where complaints in this category are not already covered by the Compulsory Jurisdiction as relevant complaints, they can, therefore, be included in the Voluntary Jurisdiction under DISP 2.6.12 R.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 2.7

The territorial scope of the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 2.7.1

handbook-rule
The territorial scope of the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service covers complaints about the activities of a firm, an appointed representative, a licensee or a VJ participant carried on from an establishment in the United Kingdom.

DISP 2.7.2

handbook-rule
The territorial scope of the jurisdiction of the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service also covers complaints about activities specified in DISP 2.6.9 R (1) to DISP 2.6.9 R (6) or activities ancillary to them carried on from an establishment elsewhere in the EEA if the following conditions are met:
(1) the activity is directed wholly or partly at the United Kingdom (or part of it);
(2) contracts governing the activity are, or (in the case of a potential customer) would have been, made under the law of England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland; and
(3) the VJ participant has notified appropriate regulators in its Home State of its intention to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction.

DISP 2.7.3

handbook-guidance
DISP 2.7.2 R (1) covers activities which the VJ participant conducts with the intention that some or all of the customers relating to that activity should reside in the United Kingdom.

DISP 2.7.4

handbook-guidance
The Compulsory Jurisdiction:
(1) covers firms (including appointed representatives) operating from an establishment in the United Kingdom, including incoming EEA firms and incoming Treaty firms which qualify for authorisation under Schedule 3 (EEA Passport Rights) or Schedule 4 (Treaty Rights) to the Act; but
(2) does not cover complaints which concern business conducted by branches of firms outside the United Kingdom or by EEA firms operating in the United Kingdom on a services basis from outside the United Kingdom.

DISP 2.7.4A

handbook-guidance
The Consumer Credit Jurisdiction covers licensees operating from an establishment in the United Kingdom, but does not cover complaints which concern business conducted by branches of licensees outside the United Kingdom.
  • 06/04/2007

DISP 2.7.5

handbook-guidance
The Voluntary Jurisdiction:
(1) covers VJ participants operating from an establishment in the United Kingdom;
(2) also covers complaints that concern business conducted by VJ participants operating elsewhere in the EEA, but only in relation to the activities specified in DISP 2.6.9 R (1) to DISP 2.6.9 R (6) subject to the conditions in DISP 2.7.2 R (1) to DISP 2.7.2 R (3).

DISP 2.7.6

handbook-guidance
A complaint can be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service irrespective of whether the complainant lives or is based in the United Kingdom.

Export chapter as

DISP 3

Complaint handling procedures of the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 3.1

Application and Purpose

Application

DISP 3.1.1

handbook-rule
This chapter applies to the Ombudsman, to firms and to licensees.

DISP 3.1.2

handbook-guidance
It is also relevant to those who might wish to refer a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 3.1.3

handbook-guidance
VJ participants are subject to the rules in this chapter by contract under the standard terms (see DISP 4).

DISP 3.1.4

handbook-rule
Except as otherwise specified, references in this chapter to a "complaint" include:
(1) a relevant new complaint and a relevant transitional complaint; and
(2) part of a complaint or a relevant new complaint or a relevant transitional complaint.

DISP 3.1.5

handbook-guidance
References in this chapter to "firms" are to be construed, where relevant, as including:
(1) in accordance with the Ombudsman Transitional Order, unauthorised persons subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints; and
(2) as a result of section 226 of the Act, unauthorised persons who were formerly firms in respect of complaints about acts or omissions which occurred at the time when they were firms, provided that the Compulsory Jurisdiction rules were in force in relation to the activity in question; and
(3) members of the Society of Lloyd's (see DISP 2.5.3 G).

DISP 3.1.5A

handbook-guidance
References in this chapter to licensees are to be construed, where relevant, as a result of section 226A of the Act, as including persons who were formerly licensees in respect of complaints about acts or omissions which occurred at the time when they were licensees, provided the complaint falls within a description specified in the Consumer Credit Jurisdiction rules in force at the time of the act or omission.
  • 06/04/2007

DISP 3.1.6

handbook-guidance
The Ombudsman Transitional Order and the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order provide, with some exceptions (see DISP 2.2.2 G and DISP 2.2.2A G (scope of Compulsory Jurisdiction and Relevant transitional complaints), DISP 2.2.3 G (time limits), DISP 2.4.14 G and DISP 2.4.15 G (eligible complainant) and DISP 3.8.2 G and DISP 3.8.2A GDISP 3.8 (determinations), for relevant new complaints and relevant transitional complaints to be determined in accordance with the requirements of the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 31/10/2004

Purpose

DISP 3.1.7

handbook-guidance
The purpose of this chapter is to set out the way in which the Financial Ombudsman Service and, in particular, the Ombudsman, will operate to ensure that complaints may be resolved quickly and with minimum formality. It sets out the procedures for the investigation and consideration of complaints, including the circumstances in which a complaint may be terminated without consideration of its merits; the evidence which may be required or admitted; the provisions for fixing and extending time limits for different aspects of the proceedings; the factors which the Ombudsman will take into account in determining what is fair and reasonable; the types of loss or damage for which the Ombudsman can award compensation; the limits on awards and the costs that can be awarded.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.2

The investigation and consideration of complaints by the Ombudsman

DISP 3.2.1

handbook-rule
On receipt of a complaint (and subsequently if necessary) the Ombudsman must have regard to the following matters:
(1) whether or not the complaint meets the criteria in DISP 2.2 (Which complaints can be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service?);
(2) whether or not the complaint is within the time limits in DISP 2.3 (Time limits for referral of complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service);
(3) whether or not the complainant is an eligible complainant; and
(4) whether or not the complaint is one which should be dismissed without consideration of its merits under DISP 3.3(Dismissal of complaints without consideration of the merits).

DISP 3.2.2

handbook-guidance
In the case of relevant new complaints, the Ombudsman will take account of the relevant criteria under the Ombudsman Transitional Order, referred to in DISP 2.2.2 G, and will extend the time limits in DISP 2.3, as required under article 4(2) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order and described in DISP 2.3.2 G.

DISP 3.2.3

handbook-rule
Where the firm or licensee has not had the eight weeks from receipt of the complaint in which to consider it, the Ombudsman will refer the complaint to the firm or licensee, unless the firm or licensee has already issued a final response.

DISP 3.2.4

handbook-rule
Where a firm or licensee fails to send a complainant a final response by the end of eight weeks, the Ombudsman may consider the complaint.

DISP 3.2.5

handbook-rule
Where the Ombudsman considers that the complaint or the complainant may be ineligible under the jurisdiction rules (see DISP 2 (Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service)) he must give the complainant an opportunity to make representations before he reaches his decision and he must give reasons to the complainant for that decision and inform the firmor licenseeof his decision.

DISP 3.2.6

handbook-guidance
DISP 3.2.5 R applies without prejudice to a firm'sor licensee's right to raise the issue of eligibility subsequently.

DISP 3.2.7

handbook-rule
Where the firmor licenseedisputes the eligibility of the complaint or the complainant, the Ombudsman must give the parties an opportunity to make representations before he reaches his decision and he must give reasons to the parties for that decision.

DISP 3.2.8

handbook-rule
Where the Ombudsman considers that the complaint may be one which should be dismissed without consideration of its merits, under DISP 3.3 (Dismissal of complaints without consideration of the merits), he must give the complainant an opportunity to make representations before he makes his decision. If he then decides that the complaint should be dismissed, he must give reasons to the complainant for that decision and inform the firmor licensee of that decision.

DISP 3.2.9

handbook-rule
Where the Ombudsman considers that both the complaint and the complainant are eligible and that there is a reasonable prospect of resolving the complaint by mediation, he may attempt to negotiate a settlement between the parties.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.2.10

handbook-guidance
The Ombudsman will attempt to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage and by whatever means appear to him to be most appropriate, including mediation or investigation.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.2.11

handbook-rule
If the Ombudsman decides that an investigation is necessary, he will:
(1) during the investigation, give both parties an opportunity of making representations;
(2) send to the parties a provisional assessment, setting out his reasons and a time limit within which either party must respond; and
(3) if either party indicates disagreement with the provisional assessment within the time limit prescribed in DISP 3.2.11 R (2), proceed to determination (see DISP 3.8 (Determination by the Ombudsman)).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.2.12

handbook-rule
The parties will be informed of their right to make representations before the Ombudsman makes a determination. If he considers that the complaint can be fairly determined without convening a hearing, he will determine the complaint. If not, he will invite the parties to attend a hearing. No hearing will be held after the Ombudsman has determined the complaint.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.2.13

handbook-rule
A party who wishes to request a hearing must do so in writing, setting out the issues he wishes to raise and (if appropriate) any reasons why he considers the hearing should be in private, so that the Ombudsman may consider whether the issues are material, whether a hearing should take place and, if so, whether it should be held in public or private.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.2.14

handbook-guidance
In deciding if there should be a hearing and, if so, whether it should be in public or private, the Ombudsman will have regard to the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.3

Dismissal of complaints without consideration of the merits

DISP 3.3.1

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman may dismiss a complaint without considering its merits if he:
(1) is satisfied that the complainant has not suffered, or is unlikely to suffer, financial loss, material distress or material inconvenience; or
(2) considers the complaint to be frivolous or vexatious; or
(3) considers that the complaint clearly does not have any reasonable prospect of success; or
(4) is satisfied that the firmor licenseehas already made an offer of compensation which is fair and reasonable in relation to the circumstances alleged by the complainant and which is still open for acceptance; or
(5) is satisfied that the complaint relates to a transaction which the firmor licenseein question has reviewed in accordance with the regulatory standards for the review of such transactions prevailing at the time of the review, or in accordance with the terms of a scheme order under section 404 of the Act (Schemes for reviewing past business), including, if appropriate, making an offer of redress to the complainant, unless he is of the opinion that the standards or terms of the scheme order did not address the particular circumstances of the case; or
(5A) is satisfied that the firm or licensee in question has reviewed the complaint in accordance with any formal regulatory requirement, standard or guidance published by the FSA or other regulator in respect of that type of complaint, including, if appropriate, making an offer of redress to the complainant, unless he is of the opinion that the terms of the requirement, standard or guidance did not address the particular circumstances of the case; or
(6) is satisfied that the matter has previously been considered or excluded under the Financial Ombudsman Service, or a former scheme (unless material new evidence likely to affect the outcome has subsequently become available); or
(7) is satisfied that the matter has been dealt with, or is being dealt with, by a comparable independent complaints scheme or dispute resolution process; or
(8) is satisfied that the subject matter of the complaint has been the subject of court proceedings where there has been a decision on the merits; or
(9) is satisfied that the subject matter of the complaint is the subject of current court proceedings unless proceedings are stayed or sisted (by agreement of all parties or order of the court) in order that the matter may be considered under the Financial Ombudsman Service; or
(10) considers that it would be more suitable for the matter to be dealt with by a court, arbitration or another complaints scheme; or
(11) is satisfied that it is a complaint about the legitimate exercise of a firm'sor licensee's commercial judgment; or
(12) is satisfied that it is a complaint about employment matters from an employee or employees of a firm or licensee; or
(13) is satisfied that it is a complaint about investment performance; or
(14) is satisfied that it is a complaint about a firm'sor licensee'sdecision when exercising a discretion under a will or private trust; or
(15) is satisfied that it is a complaint about a firm'sor licensee'sfailure to consult beneficiaries before exercising a discretion under a will or private trust, where there is no legal obligation to consult; or
(16) is satisfied that a complaint which involves or might involve more than one eligible complainant has been referred without the consent of the other complainant or complainants and the Ombudsman considers that it would be inappropriate to deal with the complaint without that consent; or
(17) is satisfied that there are other compelling reasons why it is inappropriate for the complaint to be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 3.3.1A

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman may dismiss a complaint without considering its merits if:
(1) before he has made a determination, he has received in writing from the firmor licensee:
(a) a detailed statement of how and why, in the firm'sor licensee's opinion, the complaint raises an important or novel point of law with significant consequences; and
(b) an undertaking in favour of the complainant that, if the complainant or the firm or the licensee commences court proceedings against the other in respect of the complaint in any court in the United Kingdom, within six months of the complaint being dismissed, the firm or licensee will: pay the complainant's reasonable costs and disbursements (to be assessed if not agreed on an indemnity basis) in connection with the proceedings at first instance and any subsequent appeal proceedings brought by the firm or licensee; and make interim payments on account of such costs if and to the extent that it appears reasonable to do so; and
(2) the Ombudsman considers that the complaint:
(a) raises an important or novel point of law, which has important consequences; and
(b) would more suitably be dealt with by a court as a test case.

DISP 3.3.1B

handbook-guidance
Factors the Ombudsman may take into account in considering whether to dismiss under DISP 3.3.1A R include (but are not limited to):
(1) whether the point of law is central to the outcome of the dispute;
(2) how important or novel the point of law is in the context of the dispute;
(3) the significance of the consequences of the dispute for the business of the firmor licensee or for its customers;
(4) the significance of the consequences of the dispute for the business of firmsor licensees in that sector or for their customers;
(5) the amount at stake in the dispute;
(6) the remedies that a court could impose;
(7) any representations made by the firm, licensee or the complainant; and
(8) the stage already reached in consideration of the dispute.

DISP 3.3.2

handbook-guidance
Under article 5(2)(c) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order, the Ombudsman, in deciding whether a relevant complaint is to be dismissed without consideration of its merits, is to take into account whether an equivalent complaint would have been so dismissed under the former scheme in question, as it had effect immediately before commencement.

DISP 3.3.2A

handbook-guidance
Under article 4(2) of the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order, the Ombudsman, in deciding whether a relevant transitional complaint is to be dismissed without consideration of its merits, must take into account whether an equivalent complaint would have been so dismissed under the former scheme in question, as it had effect immediately before the relevant commencement date.
  • 31/10/2004

DISP 3.3.3

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of DISP 3.3.1 R (4), offers of compensation include ex gratia payments.

DISP 3.3.4

handbook-guidance
In DISP 3.3.1 R (5) the transaction could, for example, be a pension transaction which has been reviewed by the firm in accordance with the relevant regulatory standards. The Ombudsman may decide not to proceed with a complaint about the result of that review unless he considers that the standards or guidance published by the regulator did not address the particular circumstances of the case.

DISP 3.3.5

handbook-guidance
When deciding if it would be suitable for a complaint to be dealt with outside the Financial Ombudsman Service (DISP 3.3.1 R (10)), the Ombudsman may consider whether, in view of a conflict of evidence, a fair resolution of the complaint could be achieved only through examination of the evidence by the courts.

DISP 3.3.6

handbook-guidance
The Ombudsman may decide to proceed with a complaint which would otherwise be dismissed under DISP 3.3.1 R (13), DISP 3.3.1 R (14) or DISP 3.3.1 R (15) if he considers that the complaint involves an allegation of negligence or maladministration.

DISP 3.4

Referral of a complaint to another complaints scheme for determination

DISP 3.4.1

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman may refer a complaint to another complaints scheme where he considers that it would be more suitable for the matter to be determined by that scheme and the complainant consents to the referral.

DISP 3.5

Evidence

DISP 3.5.1

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman may, in relation to the evidence which may be required or admitted when he considers and determines a complaint, give directions as to:
(1) the issues on which evidence is required;
(2) the extent to which the evidence required to decide those issues should be oral or written; and
(3) the way in which the evidence should be presented to the Ombudsman.

DISP 3.5.2

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman may:
(1) exclude evidence that would otherwise be admissible in a court of law or include evidence that would not be admissible in such a court;
(2) where he considers it necessary or appropriate, accept information in confidence, so that only an edited version or (where this is not practicable) a summary or description is disclosed to the other party;
(3) reach a decision on the basis of what has been supplied and take account of the failure by a complainant or a firm or licensee to provide information that an Ombudsman has requested; and
(4) dismiss a complaint if a complainant fails to supply required information.

DISP 3.5.3

handbook-guidance
The provisions in DISP 3.5.2 R (1) follow the provisions of the Civil Justice Rules.

DISP 3.5.4

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of DISP 3.5.2 R (2), evidence which the Ombudsman may accept in confidence includes confidential evidence about third parties and security information.

DISP 3.5.5

handbook-guidance
The Ombudsman may request a party to a complaint to provide evidence necessary for the determination of the complaint under section 231 of the Act. A failure to comply with the request can be dealt with by the court under section 232.

DISP 3.5.6

handbook-guidance
The Ombudsman may, where he considers it appropriate, take into account evidence from third parties; including, but not limited to, the FSA, other regulators, experts in industry matters and experts in consumer matters.

DISP 3.6

Time limits

DISP 3.6.1

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman may fix time limits and extend fixed time limits for any aspect of the consideration of a complaint by the Financial Ombudsman Service.

DISP 3.6.2

handbook-rule
If a firm or licensee fails to comply with a time limit, the Ombudsman may proceed to the next stage of consideration of the complaint and may, if appropriate, make provision for any material distress or material inconvenience caused by that failure in any award which he decides to make.

DISP 3.6.3

handbook-rule
If a complainant fails to comply with a time limit, the Ombudsman may either proceed to the next stage or dismiss the complaint.

DISP 3.7

Delegation of the Ombudsman's powers

DISP 3.7.1

handbook-rule
  1. (1) Only an Ombudsman may determine a complaint or decide the circumstances in which information may be disclosed under DISP 3.10.1 R (3).
  2. (2) The Ombudsman may designate members of the staff of FOS Ltd to exercise any of the other powers of the Ombudsman relating to the reference, investigation or consideration of a complaint.
  3. (3) Where any person is so designated, DISP 2 - DISP 4 apply as if any reference to "the Ombudsman" included a reference to that person.

DISP 3.7.2

handbook-guidance
The Chief Ombudsman will designate those members of staff of FOS Ltd who are to have these powers.

DISP 3.8

Determination by the Ombudsman

Opinion as to fairness and reasonableness

DISP 3.8.1

handbook-rule
(1) The Ombudsman will determine a complaint by reference to what is, in his opinion, fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case.
(2) In considering what is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case, the Ombudsman will take into account the relevant law, regulations, regulators' rules and guidance and standards, relevant codes of practice and, where appropriate, what he considers to have been good industry practice at the relevant time.

DISP 3.8.2

handbook-guidance
In determining, in relation to a relevant new complaint, what is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case and what amount (if any) constitutes fair compensation, for the purposes of section 229(2)(a) of the Act (money awards), the Ombudsman is required, under article 7(2) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order, to take into account:
(1) what determination the former Ombudsman might have been expected to reach, and
(2) what amount (if any) might have been expected to be awarded by way of compensation;
in relation to an equivalent complaint dealt with under the former scheme in question immediately before commencement.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.8.2A

handbook-guidance
In determining, in relation to a relevant transitional complaint, what is fair and reasonable in all circumstances of the case and what amount (if any) constitutes fair compensation for the purposes of section 229(2)(a) of the Act, the Ombudsman is required, under article 5(2) of the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order, to take into account what determination might have been expected to be made under the former scheme in question and what amount (if any) might have been expected to have been awarded or recommended by way of compensation under that scheme, in relation to an equivalent complaint dealt with under the former scheme immediately before the relevant commencement date.
  • 31/10/2004

The Ombudsman's determination

DISP 3.8.3

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman's determination will include the following stages:
(1) When a complaint has been determined, the Ombudsman will give both the complainant and the firm or licensee a signed written statement of the determination, stating the reasons for it.
(2) The statement will invite the complainant to notify the Ombudsman in writing before the date specified in the statement whether he accepts or rejects the determination.
(3) If the complainant notifies the Ombudsman that he accepts the determination within the time limit set, it is final and binding on both the complainant and the firm or licensee.
(4) If the complainant either rejects the determination or does not notify the Ombudsman by the specified date that he accepts the determination, the complainant will be treated as having rejected the determination, and the firm or licensee will not be bound by it.
(5) The Ombudsman must notify the firm or licensee of the complainant's response (or lack of response).

DISP 3.9

Awards by the Ombudsman

Money awards

DISP 3.9.1

handbook-guidance
As provided for under section 229 of the Act (Awards), if a complaint is determined in favour of the complainant, the determination may include:
(1) a money award against the firm or licensee of such amount as the Ombudsman considers fair compensation for financial loss or for loss or damage of a kind specified in DISP 3.9.2 G and subject to the maximum limit in DISP 3.9.5 R; or
(2) a direction that the firm or licensee take such steps in relation to the complainant as the Ombudsman considers just and appropriate (whether or not a court could order those steps to be taken); or
(3) both of these.

DISP 3.9.2

handbook-rule
Where the Ombudsman decides to make a money award, in addition to (or instead of) awarding compensation for financial loss, he may award compensation for the following kinds of loss or damage, whether or not a court would award compensation:
(1) pain and suffering; or
(2) damage to reputation; or
(3) distress or inconvenience.

DISP 3.9.3

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of awards by the Ombudsman, financial loss includes consequential or prospective loss.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.4

handbook-guidance
In determining, in relation to a relevant new complaint, what amount (if any) constitutes fair compensation for the purposes of a money award, the Ombudsman is required under article 7(2) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order to take into account what amount (if any) might have been expected to be awarded by way of compensation, in relation to an equivalent complaint dealt with under the former scheme in question immediately before commencement.
  • 01/04/2002

Limits on money awards

DISP 3.9.5

handbook-rule
The maximum money award which the Ombudsman may make is £100,000.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.6

handbook-guidance
If the Ombudsman considers that an amount more than the maximum is required as fair compensation, then he may in addition recommend to the firm or licensee that it pays the balance.

DISP 3.9.7

handbook-guidance
The Ombudsman may specify in his award that reasonable interest must be paid on the award (at the rate and from the date he states).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.8

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of calculating the monetary limit referred to in DISP 3.9.5 R the amount of interest awarded does not form part of the award itself.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.9

handbook-guidance
The limit on the maximum money award has no bearing on any direction which an Ombudsman may make as part of a determination.
  • 01/04/2002

Costs

DISP 3.9.10

handbook-rule
When the Ombudsman finds in a complainant's favour, he may also award an amount which covers some or all of the costs which were reasonably incurred by the complainant in respect of the complaint.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.11

handbook-guidance
It is not anticipated that awards of costs will be common, since in most cases complainants should not need to have professional advisers to bring complaints to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.12

handbook-rule
The amount payable under the award of costs may, if the Ombudsman orders, bear interest at a reasonable rate specified in the order and from a date specified in the order.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.13

handbook-guidance
For the purposes of calculating the monetary limit specified in DISP 3.9.5 R, an award of costs does not form part of the award itself.
  • 01/04/2002

Complying with awards and settlements

DISP 3.9.14

handbook-rule
A firm or licensee must comply promptly with:
(1) any money award or direction made by the Ombudsman or any award of money or other award made by an ombudsman appointed under the PIA Ombudsman scheme (including any interest payable by order of the PIA Ombudsman or the Ombudsman); and
(2) any settlement which it agrees at an earlier stage of the procedures.

DISP 3.9.15

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman must maintain a register of each money award and direction made.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.16

handbook-guidance
A money award registered in accordance with DISP 3.9.15 R can be recovered or enforced through the courts under paragraph 16 of Schedule 17 to the Act.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.9.17

handbook-guidance
A complainant may enforce a direction by injunction or order in accordance with section 229(9) of the Act (Awards).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.10

Dealing with information

  • 01/12/2004

DISP 3.10.1

handbook-rule
(1) In dealing with any information received in relation to the consideration or investigation of a complaint, the Financial Ombudsman Service must have regard to the parties' rights of privacy.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not prevent the Ombudsman disclosing information (either in full, or where he considers it necessary or appropriate under DISP 3.5.2 R (2), in the form of an edited version or (where this is not practicable) a summary or description):
(a) to the extent that he is required or authorised to do so by law; or
(b) to the parties to the complaint; or
(c) in his determination; or
(d) at a hearing in connection with the complaint.
(3) So long as he has regard to the parties' rights of privacy, the Ombudsman may disclose information to the FSA or any other body exercising regulatory or statutory functions for the purpose of assisting that body or the Financial Ombudsman Service to discharge its functions.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 3.10.2

handbook-guidance
Under article 11 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order and article 11 of the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order, any information held by any person responsible for the operation of a former scheme in connection with the operation of a former scheme may be disclosed by that person (after commencement or, as the case may be, the relevant commencement date) to FOS Ltd or to an Ombudsman without contravening any restriction on disclosure of that information (imposed by statute or otherwise) to which that person was subject. But FOS Ltd or the Ombudsman is subject to any restrictions on disclosure (and exceptions) which would have applied to the former holder of that information.
  • 31/10/2004

DISP 3.10.3

handbook-guidance
Article 11 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order and article 11 of the Mortgage and General Insurance Complaints Transitional Order do not, however, prevent the application of section 31(4A) of the Data Protection Act 1998. This provides for an exemption in respect of subject information provisions to the extent to which the application of those provisions to data would be likely to prejudice the proper discharge of the functions conferred under Part XVI of the Act (The Ombudsman Scheme).
  • 31/10/2004

Export chapter as

DISP 4

Standard terms

DISP 4.1

Application and Purpose

Application

DISP 4.1.1

handbook-guidance
The standard terms apply to any company, partnership, individual practitioner or other business which has decided to be a participant in the Voluntary Jurisdiction (a VJ participant). They are fixed by FOS Ltd with the approval of the FSA in accordance with paragraph 18 of Schedule 17 to the Act.

Purpose

DISP 4.1.2

handbook-guidance
The standard terms are the basis on which complaints will be dealt with and determined under the Voluntary Jurisdiction. They cover:
(1) the rules and guidance for handling complaints (see DISP 4.2.2 R to DISP 4.2.6 R);
(2) an indemnity for FOS Ltd, any member of its governing body, any member of its staff and any person acting as an Ombudsman, as permitted by paragraph 18(5) of Schedule 17 to the Act (see DISP 4.2.7 R);
(3) the Ombudsman's powers relating to determinations and awards (see DISP 4.2.8 R);
(4) the enforcement of a determination (see DISP 4.2.10 R); and
(5) the process for withdrawal by a VJ participant from the Voluntary Jurisdiction (see DISP 4.2.11 R).

DISP 4.2

The standard terms

DISP 4.2.1

handbook-rule
(1) For the purposes of the standard terms, a company, partnership, individual practitioner or other business, whether authorised or unauthorised, agreeing to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service is known as a VJ participant.
(2) In consequence of the agreement by the VJ participant to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction, the standard terms fix the basis on which complaints relating to relevant acts or omissions of the VJ participant are to be dealt with and determined.
(3) Where the standard terms apply rules relating to the Compulsory Jurisdiction for the purposes of the Voluntary Jurisdiction, those are to be treated as part of the standard terms.
(4) A VJ participant is subject to the standard terms, which may be amended or supplemented with the approval of the FSA.

Complaint handling procedures

DISP 4.2.2

handbook-rule
By agreeing to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction, a VJ participant agrees to handle complaints in accordance with the provisions of DISP 1 which apply to VJ participants.

DISP 4.2.3

handbook-guidance
DISP 1.5.1 R contains a requirement for a firm in the Compulsory Jurisdiction to make and retain records of complaints subject to DISP 1.4 - DISP 1.6 for a minimum period of three years from the date of its receipt of a complaint. Although this requirement is not applied to VJ participants, they may need to keep records of complaints for sufficient time to enable them to provide the Ombudsman with necessary information in the event of a complaint being referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The requirement for reporting complaints to the FSA under DISP 1.5.4 R is also not applied to VJ participants.

Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 4.2.4

handbook-rule
The rules and guidance contained in DISP 2 will apply for the purposes of the Voluntary Jurisdiction, with the exception of DISP 2.6.1 R - DISP 2.6.8 G.

DISP 4.2.5

handbook-rule
By agreeing to participate in the Voluntary Jurisdiction, a VJ participant also agrees to complaints relating to activities covered by DISP 2.6.9 R being dealt with under DISP 2.6.12 R.

Complaint handling procedures of the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 4.2.6

handbook-rule
The rules and guidance contained in DISP 3 will apply to VJ participants for the purposes of the Voluntary Jurisdiction as if they were firms (except where their application to VJ participants is specifically excluded or necessarily inapplicable).

Liability

DISP 4.2.7

handbook-rule
(1) None of the following is to be liable in damages for anything done or omitted in the discharge, or purported discharge, of any functions in connection with the Voluntary Jurisdiction:
(a) FOS Ltd;
(b) any member of its governing body;
(c) any member of its staff;
(d) any person acting as an Ombudsman for the purposes of the Financial Ombudsman Service.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply:
(a) where the act or omission is shown to have been in bad faith; or
(b) so as to prevent an award of damages made in respect of an act or omission on the ground that the act or omission was unlawful as a result of section 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Determination and awards

DISP 4.2.8

handbook-rule
If the Ombudsman determines a complaint under the Voluntary Jurisdiction in favour of the complainant, the determination may include:
(1) a "money award", that is, an award against the VJ participant of such amount as the Ombudsman considers fair compensation for financial loss or for loss or damage of a kind specified in DISP 3.9.2 G that has been suffered, or may be suffered, by the complainant;
(2) a direction that the VJ participant take such steps in relation to the complainant as the Ombudsman considers just and appropriate (whether or not a court could order those steps to be taken).

DISP 4.2.9

handbook-guidance
DISP 4.2.8 R gives the Ombudsman the same powers to make money awards and directions as he has, under section 229 of the Act (Awards), in relation to firms in the Compulsory Jurisdiction.
  • 01/04/2002

Enforcement of a determination

DISP 4.2.10

handbook-rule
The Ombudsman's determination, if accepted by the complainant within the time limit specified by the Ombudsman, will be binding on the VJ participant and final, and may be enforced in court by the complainant.
  • 01/04/2002

Withdrawal from the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service

DISP 4.2.11

handbook-rule
A VJ participant may not withdraw from the Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service unless the VJ participant:
(1) has submitted a written plan to FOS Ltd setting out its proposals for:
(a) notifying its existing customers of its intention to withdraw from the Voluntary Jurisdiction; and
(b) the handling of complaints against it prior to its withdrawal from the Voluntary Jurisdiction; and
(2) the plan has been approved in writing by FOS Ltd; and
(3) the VJ participant has paid the general levy for the year in which it withdraws and any other fees payable; and
(4) FOS Ltd has agreed in writing the date on which the VJ participant may withdraw from the Voluntary Jurisdiction (which date is not to be earlier than six months from the date of approval of the plan).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP 4.2.12

handbook-rule
The following rules in FEES 5 apply (subject to DISP 4.2.13 R) to VJ participants as part of their agreement to be subject to the Voluntary Jurisdiction as if they were authorised firms, but subject to the variations stated in each case.
(1) FEES 5.3.6 R (general levy) subject to substituting the words 'Voluntary Jurisdiction' for 'Compulsory Jurisdiction' and substituting the words 'FOS Ltd' for 'the FSA';
(2) FEES 5.3.8 R (calculation of general levy);
(3) FEES 5.4.1 R (information) subject to substituting the words 'FOS Ltd' for 'FSA';
(4) FEES 5.5.1 R (standard case fee);
(5) FEES 5.5.6 R (special case fee);
(6) FEES 5.6.5 R subject to substituting 'to FOS Ltd' for 'to the FSA' and FEES 5.6.6 R (supplementary levy for establishment costs) subject to substituting 'Part 4' for 'Part 2';
(7) FEES 5.7.1 R subject to substituting 'to FOS Ltd' for 'to the FSA' and 'by FOS Ltd' for 'by the FSA', FEES 5.7.2 R to FEES 5.7.3 R , FEES 2.2.2 G , FEES 2.2.1 R , FEES 2.3.1 R and FEES 2.3.2 R (payment).
(8) FEES 5.8.1 R (joining the Financial Ombudsman Service) and FEES 4.2.6 R (1)(b);
(9) FEES 5 Annex 1 R (fees payable).

DISP 4.2.13

handbook-rule
A VJ participant which joins the Voluntary Jurisdiction before the end of the financial year in which the commencement day falls must pay to FOS Ltd the special case fee specified in FEES 5 Annex 1 R for FEES 5.5.10 R in respect of each chargeable case falling within the Voluntary Jurisdiction and closed under the Financial Ombudsman Service before 31 March 2002, unless it was, immediately before the commencement day, a member of a former scheme, which was paid an agreed sum to the FOS Ltd in respect of the handling of complaints against its former members up to 31 March 2002.

DISP 4.2.14

handbook-guidance
At commencement, the general levy, supplementary levy and standard and special case fees which will apply to VJ participants under DISP 4.2.12 R will not have been fixed. So, in order to fund the Voluntary Jurisdiction until the end of 2001/02 financial year, VJ participants joining in the period up to the end of the first financial year after commencement will pay the special case fee in DISP 4.2.13 R. The fee is the same as that specified for firms not in former schemes which become subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction at commencement.
  • 01/12/2004

Export chapter as

DISP 5

Funding Rules

DISP 5.1

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.2

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.3

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.4

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.5

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.6

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.7

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.8

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.9

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5.10

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding).]

DISP 5 Annex 1R

[deleted: provisions relating to the funding rules for the Financial Ombudsman Service are set out in FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding)]

Export chapter as

DISP App 1

Relevant Existing Complaints

DISP App 1.1

Application and Purpose

Application

DISP App 1.1.1

handbook-rule
This appendix applies to firms, to FOS Ltd, to the Ombudsman and to those who might wish to refer a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service in respect of relevant existing complaints.

DISP App 1.1.2

handbook-guidance
References in this chapter to "firms" are to be construed, where relevant, as including:
(1) in accordance with the Ombudsman Transitional Order, unauthorised persons subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction in relation to relevant complaints; and
(2) as a result of section 226 of the Act, unauthorised persons who were formerly firms in respect of complaints about acts or omissions which occurred at the time when they were firms, provided that the Compulsory Jurisdiction rules were in force in relation to the activity in question.

Purpose

DISP App 1.1.3

handbook-rule
DISP 2 to DISP 4 and FEES 5 apply to firms, to the Ombudsman and to FOS Ltd in respect of relevant existing complaints, except as stated in this appendix.

DISP App 1.1.4

handbook-guidance
The purpose of this appendix is to describe how FOS Ltd must handle relevant existing complaints (that is, the partly completed complaints which it inherits from the former schemes at commencement under the Ombudsman Transitional Order). Complaints which firms (as opposed to the former schemes) have partly completed at commencement will be handled as described in DISP 1 (Complaint handling procedures for firms) (see, in particular, DISP 1.4.6 R).

DISP App 1.1.5

handbook-guidance
Relevant existing complaints will be referred by the former schemes to FOS Ltd for completion at commencement. Article 2 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order provides that FOS Ltd will complete the handling of these cases, but requires that, in a significant number of respects, it must do this in accordance with the requirements of the relevant former scheme.

DISP App 1.1.6

handbook-guidance
This appendix describes the ways in which FOS Ltd is required to treat these complaints differently from the other complaints which are subject to DISP 1 to DISP 4 and FEES 5. Apart from these exceptions, the rules in DISP 2 to DISP 4 and FEES 5 and the statutory provisions in sections 225-234 of the Act apply as they do to other complaints.

DISP App 1.2

Eligible complaint

DISP App 1.2.1

handbook-guidance
(1) Article 2 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order requires that, irrespective of whether the conditions set out in section 226(2) of the Act are met (see DISP 2.2.1 G), a complaint which:
(a) was referred to a former scheme (other than the Personal Insurance Arbitration Service) at any time before commencement, by a person who was at that time entitled, under the terms of the former scheme, to refer such a complaint (whether described in that scheme as the making of a complaint, the referral of a dispute, the submission of a claim, or otherwise), and
(b) has not, before commencement, been rejected, withdrawn, settled or determined, by the former Ombudsman (whether by a substantive decision, or by closure of the case without a substantive decision);
is to be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service (and not the former scheme).
(2) These complaints are described as relevant existing complaints.

DISP App 1.2.2

handbook-guidance
Article 2 of the Ombudsman Transitional Order provides that a complaint is not to be treated as determined before commencement if the determination was, at commencement, subject to (or capable of being subject to) an appeal, a reference to arbitration or similar procedure.

DISP App 1.2.3

handbook-guidance
The definition of a relevant existing complaint excludes complaints referred to the Personal Insurance Arbitration Service before commencement, which will be completed by the Personal Insurance Arbitration Service, not FOS Ltd. It also excludes complaints about pre-commencement investment business conducted by firms which were formerly authorised by a recognised professional body. These will be handled by the relevant professional body.

DISP App 1.3

Eligible complainant

DISP App 1.3.1

handbook-guidance
Under article 2(1)(a) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order, a person will be treated under the Financial Ombudsman Service as an eligible complainant in respect of a relevant existing complaint, if he was entitled, under the terms of the former scheme, to refer such a complaint at the time when the complaint was referred to that scheme.

DISP App 1.4

Time limits

DISP App 1.4.1

handbook-guidance
Article 4(2) of the Ombudsman Transitional Order requires an Ombudsman to extend the time limits set under DISP 2.3.1 R(1)(b) and (c) in respect of a relevant existing complaint where the effect of that extension is that the time limit applying to the complaint is the same as that which would have applied under the former scheme in question as it had effect immediately before commencement.

DISP App 1.5

Determination of complaints

DISP App 1.5.1

handbook-guidance
Article 5(2)(a) provides that FOS Ltd's power to specify in its scheme rules the matters to be taken into account in making determinations does not apply to relevant existing complaints (see DISP 3.8.1 R).

DISP App 1.5.2

handbook-guidance
Article 5(2)(c) requires the Ombudsman, in deciding whether a relevant complaint (including a relevant existing complaint) is to be dismissed without consideration of its merits under the scheme rules, to take into account whether an equivalent complaint would have been so dismissed under the former scheme in question, as it had effect immediately before commencement.

DISP App 1.5.3

handbook-guidance
Article 6(1) disapplies, in respect of relevant existing complaints, the provisions in the Act relating to the criteria for determining complaints in section 228(2) and those relating to awards in section 229 (with the exception of those in section 229(8)(b) and paragraph 16 of Schedule 17 relating to the enforceability of money awards and those in section 229(9) and (10) relating to the enforceability of directions made by the Ombudsman). It also disapplies the provisions relating to costs awards in section 230, except to the extent referred to in DISP App 1.11.1 G.

DISP App 1.5.4

handbook-guidance
Apart from this, section 228 of the Act applies in relation to relevant existing complaints as it applies to other complaints which are subject to the Compulsory Jurisdiction.

DISP App 1.6

Criteria for determining complaints

DISP App 1.6.1

handbook-guidance
Article 6(2) provides that a relevant existing complaint is to be determined (so far as practicable) by reference to such criteria as would have applied to the determination of the complaint by the former ombudsman under the former scheme in question immediately before commencement (provided that where the former scheme in question is the FSA scheme, the criteria are those which would have applied to the determination of the complaint by an independent investigator under that scheme at that time).

DISP App 1.6.2

handbook-guidance
An exception is, however, made in respect of relevant existing complaints about former IMRO members inherited from the Investment Ombudsman under the IMRO scheme in order to reflect the way in which those complaints have been determined in practice under that scheme. The effect of article 6(2) and 6(11) taken together is that, as with all new complaints received after commencement, these will be determined according to what is, in the opinion of the Ombudsman, fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case and will be binding on both parties subject to the complainant's agreement.

DISP App 1.7

Awards and remedies

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.7.1

handbook-guidance
The remedy that the Ombudsman can impose in determining a relevant existing complaint is limited by article 6(3) to such remedy as could have been included in a determination (whether described as a determination, award, recommendation or otherwise) made by the former Ombudsman under the former scheme in question immediately before commencement.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.8

Extent to which awards are binding

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.8.1

handbook-guidance
Under article 6, except in the circumstances set out in DISP App 1.8.2 G to DISP App 1.8.6 G, the Ombudsman will, in respect of relevant existing complaints, provide the firm and the complainant with a written statement of his determination (including reasons) in accordance with section 228(3)-(9) of the Act (see DISP 3.8.3 R) and if the complainant notifies the Ombudsman, within the time period specified, that he accepts the determination, it is binding on both parties and final.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.8.2

handbook-guidance
Under article 6(7), where the former scheme in question was the FSA scheme and the relevant existing complaint was, at commencement, subject to arbitration in accordance with that scheme, the extent to which the determination of the complaint under the new scheme is binding and final depends on the terms of the arbitration. Where a complaint under the FSA scheme was not subject to arbitration at commencement, the determination of the case under the new scheme is not binding on the firm or the complainant. The requirements in section 228 (4)(c) and (5) to (7) of the Act do not apply in relation to the complaint.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.8.3

handbook-guidance
Under article 6(8), where the former scheme in question was the SFAscheme:
(1) if the relevant existing complaint has not been submitted to arbitration under that scheme, and would not have been eligible to be so submitted under that scheme as it had effect immediately before commencement (disregarding any requirement for certification by the SFA Complaints Bureau that the complaint had not been resolved by conciliation), the determination of the complaint under the Financial Ombudsman Service is not binding on the firm or the complainant;
(2) if the relevant existing complaint has been submitted to arbitration under the SFA scheme, or would have been eligible to be so submitted under that scheme as it had effect immediately before commencement (disregarding any such requirement), the determination of the complaint under the Financial Ombudsman Service is binding on the firm and the complainant and final, but if the complaint has been submitted to arbitration, the terms of arbitration are otherwise unaffected;
and the requirements in section 228(4)(c) and (5) to (7) of the Act do not apply in relation to the complaint.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.8.4

handbook-guidance
Under article 6(9), where the former scheme in question was the Building Societies Ombudsman Scheme and the relevant existing complaint was, at commencement, subject to arbitration in accordance with that scheme, the extent to which the determination of the complaint under the Financial Ombudsman Service is binding and final depends on the terms of the arbitration (which remain unaffected), and the requirements in section 228(4)(c) and (5) to (7) of the Act do not apply in relation to the complaint.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.8.5

handbook-guidance
Under article 6(10), where the former scheme in question was the Building Societies Ombudsman Scheme and the firm would have been relieved of its obligation to comply with a determination under that scheme if it had complied with conditions as to the giving of notice of its non-fulfilment of the obligations imposed by the determination, the determination of the complaint under the Financial Ombudsman Service is (notwithstanding section 228(5) of the Act) not binding on the firm if it complies with equivalent conditions. (This preserves the "publicity option" under the Building Societies Ombudsman Act 1986 in respect of relevant existing complaints.)
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.8.6

handbook-guidance
The effect of article 6(2) and 6(11) taken together is that, where the former scheme in question was the IMRO scheme, the determination will be binding on both parties subject to the complainant's agreement, unless, before commencement, the complaint has been determined by a former ombudsman under that scheme and the former ombudsman has offered the complainant adjudication (see DISP App 1.9.1 G-DISP App 1.9.2 G).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.9

Complaints determined before commencement

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.9.1

handbook-guidance
Under article 8, where, before commencement, a relevant existing complaint has been determined by a former ombudsman under the IMRO scheme and that former ombudsman has offered adjudication:
(1) if the matter is already subject to adjudication at commencement, the relevant provisions of the former scheme will continue to apply so far as practicable, with references to the Investment Ombudsman or "the Ombudsman" being read as references to FOS Ltd or an Ombudsman, as appropriate; or
(2) if the matter has not been referred to adjudication before commencement, but the complainant accepts adjudication, FOS Ltd must appoint an adjudicator to determine the matter, and if the complainant agrees to the appointment of the adjudicator, the firm must concur in the reference to adjudication.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.9.2

handbook-guidance
The relevant provisions of the IMRO scheme will apply, so far as practicable, as they would have applied to adjudication under that scheme, with references to the Investment Ombudsman or "the Ombudsman" being read as references to FOS Ltd or an Ombudsman, as appropriate.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.9.3

handbook-guidance
Under article 9, where a relevant existing complaint has been determined before commencement by a person appointed as an arbitrator under the SFAscheme:
(1) if, at commencement, that determination is the subject of an appeal, or an application for leave to appeal, under that scheme which has not been determined or withdrawn, the relevant provisions of that scheme will continue to apply to that appeal or application (and any ensuing appeal) so far as practicable;
(2) if, at commencement, an application for leave to appeal against the determination was capable of being entertained under that scheme, the relevant provisions of that scheme will apply, so far as practicable, to the making of any such application for leave and any ensuing appeal, as they would have applied to an application for leave or an appeal before commencement.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.9.4

handbook-guidance
FOS Ltd may appoint such persons, on such terms and for such duration, as it thinks fit to hear any appeal or application for leave to appeal made after commencement and references in the relevant provisions of the SFA scheme to the SFA or its Arbitration Secretariat will be read as references to FOS Ltd.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.9.5

handbook-guidance
Under article 10, where a complaint has been determined before commencement under the Building Societies Ombudsman Scheme, and, at commencement, a case either has been stated with respect to that determination for the opinion of the High Court or Court of Session under section 84(5) to (7) of the Building Societies Act 1986 and no decision has been reached on the case or could be stated under those provisions, those subsections continue to apply as if they provided for the Court to direct that the complaint be dealt with under the Financial Ombudsman Service as a relevant existing complaint.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.10

Enforceability of awards

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.10.1

handbook-guidance
Where the Ombudsman makes a determination which includes an award against a firm of compensation payable to the complainant, it is enforceable (under article 6(4)) in the same way as a money award made under the Compulsory Jurisdiction.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.10.2

handbook-guidance
Where the Ombudsman makes a determination which includes a requirement for the firm to take any steps in relation to the complainant, it is enforceable (under article 6(5)) in the same way as a direction made under the Compulsory Jurisdiction.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.11

Costs

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.11.1

handbook-guidance
Where the former scheme in question, as it had effect immediately before commencement, included provision for the award of costs, the Ombudsman may, under article 6(6), on determining the relevant existing complaint, award costs in accordance with that provision (irrespective of whether those costs were incurred, or relate to anything done, before or after commencement) and section 230(6) and (7) and paragraph 16 of Schedule 17 to the Act apply in relation to the enforcement of such an award of costs in the same way as they apply to awards of costs made under the Financial Ombudsman Service procedures.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.12

Funding and fees

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.12.1

handbook-guidance
Under FEES 5 , firms will be subject to case fees in respect of relevant complaints. If FOS Ltd deals with a relevant existing complaint against a person who is not authorised by the FSA, a special case fee will be charged (see FEES 5 (Financial Ombudsman Service Funding Rules)) and this will be recoverable as a debt to FOS Ltd in the same way as case fees relating to complaints about firms.

DISP App 1.13

Time limits, record keeping and reporting requirements

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.13.1

handbook-guidance
The time limits, record keeping and reporting requirements in DISP 1.4 (Time limits for dealing with a complaint) and DISP 1.5 (Record keeping and reporting) do not apply to firms in respect of relevant existing complaints since these, by definition, will already have been referred to a former scheme.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 1.14

Cooperation with the Ombudsman

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 1.14.1

handbook-rule
Firms must comply with DISP 1.6 (Cooperation by firms with the Ombudsman) in respect of relevant existing complaints.
  • 01/04/2002

Export chapter as

DISP App 2

Handling
Mortgage Endowment Complaints

DISP App 2.1

Introduction

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 2.1.1

handbook-guidance
This appendix sets out the approach and standards which firms should use when investigating complaints relating to the sale of endowment policies for the purposes of achieving capital repayment of a mortgage. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It is primarily concerned with the assessment of whether the complainant may have suffered financial loss, and if so, how much that loss is, and therefore what amount a firm should consider offering by way of fair and appropriate compensation in circumstances where the firm's investigation of a complaint reveals:
(1) the complainant has received negligent advice on investments; and
(2) if this advice had not been negligent, either:
(a) the complainant would be unlikely to have acquired the endowment policy but instead would have taken out the same amount of loan on a repayment basis; or
(b) the complainant would have acquired an endowment mortgage for a shorter term.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.2

handbook-guidance
There will also be cases where a firm will conclude after investigation that, notwithstanding its own failure to give compliant and proper advice, the complainant would nevertheless have proceeded with the endowment policy as sold, in which case no compensation will be due.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.3

handbook-guidance
This appendix only addresses how firms should approach the assessment of loss and compensation where negligence on the part of the firm is established.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.4

handbook-guidance
This appendix is relevant both to the obligations arising under the complaints handling rules contained in DISP 1.2 and to the FSA's approach to the supervision of firms.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.5

handbook-guidance
This appendix is also relevant to complaints which the Ombudsman may investigate under the Compulsory Jurisdiction or Voluntary Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service established under Part XVI of the Act (The Ombudsman Scheme).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.6

handbook-guidance
Before proceeding to assess the extent of a complainant's financial loss, a firm will usually have completed the following stages:
(1) gathering all relevant facts and information;
(2) making a fair and objective assessment whether it has failed to comply with a relevant duty owed to the complainant; and
(3) assessing whether any failure of duty by it was in the circumstances a material failure in the sense that if it had not occurred the complainant would have been likely to have acted differently.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.7

handbook-guidance
If it is concluded that the complainant would have acted differently, the firm should proceed to assess any direct or consequential loss.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.1.8

handbook-guidance
Nothing in this appendix relieves firms of the obligation to consider the particular facts and circumstances of each complaint and to consider whether the assessment of loss and compensation should, in the light of those facts and circumstances, be carried out on a different basis. If, however, the facts and circumstances make it appropriate to do so, the FSA's expectation is that firms will apply the approach and standards set out in this appendix, and where they do not, the FSA is likely to require them to demonstrate the adequacy and completeness of their alternative approach.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2

The standard approach to redress

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 2.2.1

handbook-guidance
If there has been a failure to give compliant and proper advice, or some other breach of the duty of care, the basic objective of redress is to put the complainant, so far as is possible, in the position he would have been in if the inappropriate advice had not been given, or the other breach had not occurred. In many cases, although it must be a matter for inquiry and assessment in each individual case, this position is likely to have resulted in the complainant taking a repayment mortgage with accompanying life cover, and this is the assumption which underpins the standard approach to redress.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.2

handbook-guidance
Unless the contrary is demonstrated, it should be assumed that the complainant could have afforded the mortgage on a repayment basis.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.3

handbook-guidance
The measure of any financial loss suffered by the complainant will be arrived at by:
(1) comparing the complainant's current capital position with the position he would have been in had the loan been a standard repayment mortgage as at the date the firm decides to regard the complaint as justified; and
(2) comparing the cost of the complainant's actual monthly outgoings and those he would have made had his loan been on a standard repayment basis as at the date the firm decides to regard the complaint as justified.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.4

handbook-guidance
In some cases other factors may be included in the overall calculation, for example, if mortgage arrangement fees were waived by agreement on the occasion of the endowment policy being taken out.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.5

handbook-guidance
If, on comparing the complainant's current endowment position with the repayment alternative, the surrender value of the endowment policy exceeds the amount of the capital which the complainant would have repaid through the repayment method, then, at the point of the assessment, the complainant has suffered no capital loss (but the complainant may suffer some compensatable consequential loss associated with changing the mortgage arrangements to the repayment basis, see DISP App 2.3). Conversely, if the capital which would have been repaid on the repayment basis exceeds the surrender value, there is a capital loss represented by the difference between the two amounts.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.6

handbook-guidance
If the complainant's endowment mortgage outgoings exceed the equivalent cost for the repayment method, the complainant should be compensated for the higher payments in addition to any loss on the surrender value and capital repaid comparison. This means, for example, that if the endowment arrangement has been more expensive, this may result in compensatable loss even though the capital repayment against surrender comparison may be favourable to the endowment.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.7

handbook-guidance
If the total cost of the outgoings for the endowment calculation is less than that for the repayment calculation, the "savings" should be brought into account in assessing any overall loss unless it is unreasonable to do so.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.8

handbook-guidance
It is unlikely to be reasonable to bring "savings" into account in circumstances where, at the time of the sale of the policy:
(1) the complainant was advised or informed orally or in writing that he would have lower outgoings than would be the case under a repayment mortgage, whether or not the difference was quantified; and
(2) the complainant has dissipated those "savings" on the strength of this advice or information.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.9

handbook-guidance
The circumstances in which it may be appropriate to take some or all of the "savings" into account are those where, subject to DISP App 2.2.7 G, the complainant is of "sufficient means" so that it is reasonable for a firm to assume that the "savings" have contributed to those means.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.10

handbook-guidance
Where it is otherwise reasonable for "savings" to be brought into account, determining whether or not a complainant is of sufficient means and, if so, to what extent the "savings" are to be brought into account, will have to be based on the facts of each individual case. It will be appropriate to require the complainant to provide adequate information to assist the firm in this task. Matters to be taken into account in this assessment may include:
(1) the length of the remaining mortgage term;
(2) the complainant's current and prospective resources;
(3) the amount of the capital shortfall in proportion to the endowment outgoings balance.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.11

handbook-guidance
Firms may adopt streamlined processes to assist them in individual assessments of "sufficient means", but will have to satisfy themselves that the complainant's position is nevertheless protected. Firms will need to ensure that the complainant is given an opportunity to make an informed choice whether to accept the streamlined process, that the process itself is transparent, and that the firm is satisfied that the outcome would be fair to complainants.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.12

handbook-guidance
If a firm intends to make a deduction for all or any part of the lower endowment outgoings, the firm should explain clearly to the complainant in writing both how the 'sufficient means' test has been satisfied, including details of the information taken into account in reaching the decision, and how the deduction has been arrived at. The letter should further inform the complainant that if he is unhappy with the proposal to make a deduction, either in principle or as to the amount, he should give his reasons to the firm.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.13

handbook-guidance
If a complainant puts forward a case that it would be unreasonable for a deduction to be made, the firm should reach a fair and objective determination on the facts of all relevant matters including those set out at DISP App 2.2.8 G and DISP App 2.2.9 G.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.14

handbook-guidance
In recognition that firms may not wish, for practical reasons, to make individual assessments of "sufficient means", firms may decide not to seek to bring into account any benefit to the complainant in assessing overall compensation.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.15

handbook-guidance
It would not be unreasonable if a firm providing redress in these circumstances were to frame its offer of redress on the assumption that the complainant will agree to surrender the policy. However, firms should bear in mind that there may be circumstances where it is appropriate for the complainant to retain the policy, for example, where it is being retained as a savings vehicle.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.16

handbook-guidance
If a complainant becomes aware that he has taken out the endowment policy on the basis of unsuitable advice and inadequate information, he should if necessary, after taking appropriate advice, take reasonable steps to limit his loss, and may in any subsequent claim be unable to recover for losses which are avoidable. The complainant may have to show that he has not delayed unreasonably since becoming aware of his loss. The reasonable costs and expenses the complainant may have incurred in limiting his loss are to be taken into account in assessing his compensation. These costs and expenses are likely to include the complainant taking advice on whether he should convert from an endowment to a repayment mortgage and incurring expenses in doing so, see DISP App 2.3.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.17

handbook-guidance
The standard approach to redress can be illustrated by the following examples, which show how redress would be calculated in certain hypothetical but typical scenarios. (Because the examples are illustrative, round numbers have been used for 'established facts' in each example. The payments should be taken as being made monthly: firms should not approximate by assuming that payments are made annually. If the complainant has benefited from MIRAS, the calculations should allow for the effect of MIRAS both on the endowment mortgage and the repayment comparison.)
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.18

handbook-guidance

Table of examples of typical redress calculations

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.19

handbook-guidance

Example 1

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.20

handbook-guidance

Example 2

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.21

handbook-guidance

Example 3

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.22

handbook-guidance

Example 4

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.23

handbook-guidance

Example 5

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.24

handbook-guidance

Example 6

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.25

handbook-guidance

Example 7

  • 01/04/2002

Interest rates

DISP App 2.2.26

handbook-guidance
In fixing a repayment comparator, it would be appropriate to have regard to the repayment quotation actually provided at the time of sale. If more than one repayment quotation was obtained, the comparison should be with the quotation which approximates most closely to the terms of the endowment mortgage actually taken. If a repayment quotation was not provided, or is not now available, it should be assumed that the interest rate for the repayment comparison is the same as that of the mortgage endowment arrangements. Firms will then need to replicate interest rate changes throughout the lifetime of the comparator mortgage.
  • 01/04/2002

Life cover

DISP App 2.2.27

handbook-guidance
Unless after due inquiry there is clear evidence that the complainant with a mortgage endowment had no foreseeable need for life cover at the time the endowment arrangements were concluded, in the overall comparison between a repayment mortgage and an endowment mortgage the monthly outgoings under the repayment will include the premium for the decreasing term assurance that would have been required. This adjustment for the cost of life cover is only to be made if the firm is undertaking a comparison of monthly outgoings. It is not appropriate to deduct the cost of life cover from the capital loss calculation, as this would constitute double counting.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.2.28

handbook-guidance
If a deduction is to be attributed to the provision of life cover, the appropriate approach is to assume that the complainant took out the insurance quoted in the alternative repayment quotation provided at the time of the sale. If the quotation is not available, the deduction should be at the rates that would have been quoted at the time.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3

Remortgaging

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 2.3.1

handbook-guidance
As already noted, the basic objective of redress is to put the complainant, so far as is possible, in the position he would have been in if the inappropriate advice or other breach had not occurred: for their part, the complainants should take such reasonable steps as they can to limit loss once they are informed of the position they are in because of the failure of advice at the time of sale.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.2

handbook-guidance
In practice, it is likely to be appropriate for a complainant whose complaint has been upheld to convert to a repayment mortgage, whether or not there is financial loss to date. It will normally be possible for complainants to do so without incurring unreasonable cost. Conversion will of course mean that the complainant no longer has a policy.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.3

handbook-guidance
Firms should therefore in the case of upheld complaints inform complainants that it is likely to be appropriate and necessary for them to convert to a repayment arrangement.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.4

handbook-guidance
Firms should make it clear that they will bear the costs of conversion if the rearrangement is made with the existing lender and to the equivalent repayment mortgage. If a complainant is not willing to rearrange with the existing lender, then the costs to be paid by the firm should normally be limited to those which would have been payable had the rearrangement been made with the existing lender and to the equivalent repayment mortgage. If it is not possible to rearrange with the existing lender, for example, if the lender has a closed book, the firm should pay all costs which are not unreasonable in completing the rearrangement with an alternative provider. Such costs might include an administration fee for changing the existing arrangement, redemption penalty, arrangement fee for the new mortgage and the reasonable cost of further advice if necessary.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.5

handbook-guidance
If the "new" mortgage is, in fact, arranged at a lower interest rate than the existing loan, the benefit to the complainant should usually be disregarded, as it is always open to complainants to change their underlying mortgage arrangements at any time.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.6

handbook-guidance
If the "new" mortgage is arranged at a higher interest rate than the existing loan, the increased payment should not normally be taken into account in calculating any payment to be made to the complainant.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.7

handbook-guidance
If the complainant takes the opportunity to increase his loan on the occasion of the remortgage, the expenses which a firm pays by way of compensation should be paid by reference to the capital sum due under the "old" loan.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.8

handbook-guidance
As stated, one aspect of the conversion process is the disposal of the endowment policy. The standard approach to assessing loss requires firms to calculate loss using the surrender value. However, once loss is established on this basis and firms move to deal with redress, they may wish to consider whether there is a role for the policy's 'market value' within the traded endowment policy (TEP) market.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.9

handbook-guidance
A firm may arrange the sale of the endowment policy on the traded endowment market, provided the full implications of such a course of action are explained to the complainant and his express consent is obtained for the firm to arrange the sale. This includes informing the investor that he will continue to be the life assured under the policy. The complainant should be informed that such an arrangement may reduce or eliminate the amount of redress actually borne by the firm, but not so as to affect the amount of redress he receives.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.10

handbook-guidance
In the event that a complainant is willing to pursue this option, a firm should first have assessed the complainant's loss using the approach set out in this appendix, and the minimum amount the complainant should receive under such a sale arrangement is the sum representing the position the complainant should have been in under this appendix together with the reimbursement of remortgaging costs. In order to ensure the process does not delay the provision of redress, the firm must pay this minimum sum immediately the complainant agrees to the sale arrangement. To the extent that the net amount realised by the sale of the policy on the traded endowment market exceeds the total redress due to the complainant, this greater sum is to be paid to the complainant on completion of the sale. If the amount realised by the sale of the policy on the traded endowment market is less than the total redress due to the complainant, the firm will be responsible for the amount of the shortfall.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.3.11

handbook-guidance

Example of assessment set out at 2.3.10

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4

Policy reconstruction

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 2.4.1

handbook-guidance
This section of this appendix is primarily concerned with circumstances where the term of the mortgage and associated endowment policy extend beyond the individual complainant's normal retirement age in circumstances where the firm regards a complaint as justified because the arrangement is not affordable in retirement; and this could have, and should have, been foreseen at the time of the advice.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.2

handbook-guidance
Two sets of circumstances are examined at DISP App 2.4.3 G to DISP App 2.4.13 G. Although these are considered in isolation, firms should, as part of their investigation of all of the factors involved in the complaint, consider whether either set of circumstances should be considered in conjunction with those factors examined at DISP App 2.2.
  • 01/04/2002

Case 1

DISP App 2.4.3

handbook-guidance
If on enquiry it is found that no proper assessment of the complainant's post-retirement means had been undertaken at the time of sale, but if the likelihood had been that the complainant would have borrowed the same amount over a shorter term (up to retirement) using an endowment policy as a repayment vehicle, then an appropriate form of redress would be for the policy to be reconstructed with a shorter term.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.4

handbook-guidance
Redress should in most cases be provided by meeting the cost of rearranging the policy, by way of a lump sum payment into the policy in respect of the higher rate of premium due from its inception. It may be appropriate in individual cases to take account of the lower premiums that the complainant will have paid to date. The guidance in DISP App 2.2, as to the circumstances in which this will be appropriate, will be relevant here.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.5

handbook-guidance
If the policy extends beyond retirement age and the complainant is already retired, the policy should be reconstructed to a maturity date as at the accepted retirement date, with the policy proceeds becoming immediately payable. The costs are to be borne by the firm, subject to any lower outgoings adjustment.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.6

handbook-guidance
Firms should consider whether the reconstruction would have tax implications for complainants (see DISP App 2.5.8 G and DISP App 2.5.9 G).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.7

handbook-guidance
The reconstruction process deals with the situation to the date the policy is reconstructed. The complainant will generally be responsible for paying the increased premiums for the remaining term.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.8

handbook-guidance
At the time the complainant is advised of the revised premium, he should as a matter of good practice be provided with a reprojection based on the prevailing projection rates, which will allow him to address any projected shortfall.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.9

handbook-guidance
If it is not possible for a firm to reconstruct a policy, then it should offer the investor equivalent redress, for example, by paying a cash lump sum equivalent to the amount that would have been credited to a reconstructed policy.
  • 01/04/2002

Case 2

DISP App 2.4.10

handbook-guidance
If a loan extending into retirement was on any basis not affordable, whether or not it is reconstructed to the retirement date, firms will need to consider whether, if proper advice had been given, the loan would have been taken out at all and, if not, consider what arrangements might now need to be made in order to reduce the amount of the complainant's borrowings.
  • 01/04/2002

Mismatched loans and policy terms

DISP App 2.4.11

handbook-guidance
If a complaint is regarded as justified by the firm on the basis that the endowment policy maturity date extends beyond the mortgage term expiry date and the firm is responsible for this situation, the policy should be reconstructed so that it matures at the expiry of the mortgage term.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.12

handbook-guidance
In these circumstances the guidance given elsewhere in DISP App 2.4 will apply as appropriate.
  • 01/04/2002

Examples

DISP App 2.4.13

handbook-guidance
The following examples illustrate the approach to redress as described in this section.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.14

handbook-guidance

Example 8

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.4.15

handbook-guidance

Example 9

  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5

Additional considerations

  • 01/12/2004

Introduction

DISP App 2.5.1

handbook-guidance
This section addresses issues which may be relevant to the standard redress for unsuitability cases, as well as some post-retirement cases upheld on the grounds of affordability.
  • 01/04/2002

Continuing life cover and other policy benefits

DISP App 2.5.2

handbook-guidance
Firms will need to consider the importance for many complainants of having life assurance in place to ensure a mortgage is paid off in the event of death.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.3

handbook-guidance
If a complaint is upheld and the policy is to be surrendered as part of the settlement, the firm should remind the complainant in writing that the life cover within the endowment will be terminated and that it may therefore be appropriate to take advice about the merits or otherwise of taking out a stand-alone life policy in substitution.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.4

handbook-guidance
If a need for life assurance at inception has been established so that a deduction representing its cost has been made from the redress payable under DISP App 2.2.4 G, the firm should advise the complainant that the firm would be responsible for paying any premium for an appropriate replacement policy which exceeds that used for calculating the deduction or alternatively will, where possible, provide the cover itself at that cost. If it is not possible for the firm to provide the cover itself at the original cost, it may choose to discharge that obligation by the payment of an appropriate lump sum. Any such amount should enable the complainant to effect the cover at the original cost, with no additional cost in respect of increased age or deterioration in health. This option may be particularly relevant if the firm against which the complaint has been made is an independent intermediary which cannot itself provide the cover, although it may be possible for such a firm to arrange for the product provider to offer cover to the complainant at the original premium on payment by the independent intermediary of an appropriate lump sum to meet any increased cost.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.5

handbook-guidance
Firms will not be responsible for any increased costs resulting from the complainant choosing another product provider or for increased premiums charged by another provider chosen by the complainant in respect of the risk now presented, for example, higher premiums charged by the other provider due to deterioration in health, unless the original product provider no longer writes new business and is unable to offer revised life cover on a decreasing term assurance basis.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.6

handbook-guidance
There can be exceptional circumstances where, in order to retain suitable life cover, the endowment policy has to be retained and any additional costs will be the responsibility of the firm that sold the endowment policy.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.7

handbook-guidance
The same considerations will apply to the establishment of the need for other policy benefits including critical illness cover, disability cover and waiver of premium.
  • 01/04/2002

Taxation

DISP App 2.5.8

handbook-guidance
If, as a result of policies being surrendered or reconstructed, or if any form of underpinning or guarantee is given, there is a potential tax liability for the complainant, it will be appropriate for firms to undertake in writing to the complainant to reimburse any tax payable, or which becomes payable. Firms should make this payment on production of appropriate evidence of the liability and payment having been made.
  • 01/04/2002

"Underpinning"

DISP App 2.5.10

handbook-guidance
Firms proposing to offer arrangements involving some form of minimum underpinning or 'guarantee' should discuss their proposals with the FSA and HM Revenue and Customs at the earliest possible opportunity (see DISP App 2.5.8 G). The FSA will need to be satisfied that these proposals provide complainants with redress which is at least commensurate with the standard approaches contained in this appendix.

Reference to the guidance in firms' complaints settlement letters

DISP App 2.5.11

handbook-guidance
One of the reasons for introducing the guidance in this appendix is to seek a reduction in the number of complaints which are referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service. If a firm writes to the complainant proposing terms for settlement which are in accordance with this appendix, the letter may include a statement that the calculation of loss and redress accords with the FSAguidance, but should not imply that this extends to the assessment of whether or not the complaint should be upheld. Firms should point out that if the complainant remains dissatisfied, he may refer the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.12

handbook-guidance
A statement under DISP App 2.5.11 G should not give the impression that the proposed terms of settlement have been expressly endorsed by either the FSA or the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/04/2002

Identification of windfall benefits

DISP App 2.5.13

handbook-guidance
Windfall benefits should be determined in accordance with the principle in Needler Financial Services and Taber ('Needler'). The basic legal principle in Needler is that a windfall benefit is not to be taken into account in determining the amount of an investor's recoverable loss. The following paragraphs explain our views as to how firms may act in accordance with that principle.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.14

handbook-guidance
A windfall benefit arises where:
(1) there has been a demutualisation, distribution or reattribution of the inherited estate, or other extraordinary corporate event in a long-term insurer; and
(2) the event gave rise to 'relevant benefits', as defined in DISP App 2.5.15 G (below).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.15

handbook-guidance
'Relevant benefits' are those benefits that fall outside what is required in order that policyholders' reasonable expectations at that point of sale can be fulfilled. (The phrase 'policyholders' reasonable expectations' has technically been superseded. However, the concept now resides within the obligations imposed upon firms by FSA Principle 6 ('...a firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly....') Additionally, most of these benefits would have been paid prior to commencement, when policyholders' reasonable expectations would have been a consideration for a long-term insurer.)
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.16

handbook-guidance
The issue of free shares or cash on a demutualisation, and additional bonuses and policy enhancements given by way of incentive to approve a reattribution or distribution of an inherited estate should, unless there is evidence to the contrary, be treated as relevant benefits for the purposes of DISP App 2.5.15 G. Whether additional bonuses and policy enhancements on a demutualisation are relevant benefits should be determined by applying the test in DISP App 2.5.15 G to each benefit.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.17

handbook-guidance
Firms should review the terms on which proposals were put to policyholders and the reasons given for a corporate event when determining whether a benefit should be treated as a relevant benefit.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.18

handbook-guidance
Firms should not normally bring windfall benefits which are relevant benefits (as defined in DISP App 2.5.14 G) to account when assessing financial loss and redress. Where a windfall benefit is in the form of a policy augmentation the benefit should be deducted from the overall value of the policy when making this assessment.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.19

handbook-guidance
A relevant benefit derived from a corporate event may only be brought to account if the firm is able to demonstrate, with written records created at the time of the advice, that:
(1) The firm foresaw the prospect of the event and the benefit;
(2) The firm's advice included a statement recommending the particular policy because of the possibility of the benefit in question; and
(3) The statement was a material factor in the context of the advice and the decision to invest.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.20

handbook-guidance
If a firm considers that it can meet this requirement, the firm should by letter explain clearly to the complainant the reasons why it proposes that the benefit should not be treated as a windfall and should be taken into account. The firm should provide the complainant with copies of the relevant documents.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.5.21

handbook-guidance
The letter should also explain how the proposed value of the benefit has been calculated and should inform the complainant that if he does not accept the proposal to take the benefit into account he may tell the firm, with reasons. The letter should also say that, if he remains dissatisfied with the firm's response, he may refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6

Valuing Relevant Benefits

  • 01/12/2004

DISP App 2.6.1

handbook-guidance
If, exceptionally under the guidance at DISP App 2.5.13 G to DISP App 2.5.21 G, cash or shares derived from a corporate event are to be taken into account when assessing loss and redress, cash should be valued at the amount actually received and shares should be valued at their issue price. In both cases there should be no addition for interest.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.2

handbook-guidance
When valuing windfall augmentation benefits for the purposes of calculating loss and redress the objective is to exclude all changes arising from the windfall event. The amount of redress payable will then be equal to the amount that would have been payable if the windfall event had never occurred.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.3

handbook-guidance
A product provider should ensure that the method it adopts for valuing augmentation benefits is consistent with the statements made in the documentation published about the windfall event. Relevant documentation for the purpose of valuing such benefits will include (but is not limited to):
(1) Any description of increases in benefits in any circular to policyholders (and any other public information relating to the event);
(2) Any principles of financial management established for the management of the fund after the event;
(3) statements in any report produced by an actuary appointed under SUP 4 (Actuaries) for the event;
(4) statements in any independent actuary report produced for the event; and
(5) subsequent statements relating to bonus practice, calculation surrender values, or both.

DISP App 2.6.4

handbook-guidance
The method of valuation adopted should treat the complainant fairly overall.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.5

handbook-guidance
Where an accurate calculation of the value of an augmentation benefit either cannot be made, or would result in disproportionate expense or delay, product providers may adopt a simplified approach or a proxy method for calculating its value.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.6

handbook-guidance
A simplified approach should treat the complainants fairly overall.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.7

handbook-guidance
An actuary, appointed by a product provider under SUP 4 (Actuaries) should certify that the method adopted by the product provider for calculating the value of an augmentation benefit is in accordance with the guidance in DISP App 2.6.1 G to DISP 2.6.6 G.

Implementation

DISP App 2.6.8

handbook-guidance
The principles set out above (in DISP App 2.6.1 G to DISP App 2.6.7 G) should be applied directly to mortgage endowment complaints where the capital loss is calculated by comparing the surrender value of the endowment policy with the capital which would have been repaid using a repayment mortgage.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.9

handbook-guidance
In most cases where there is a loss, the endowment policy will be surrendered and put towards the cost of setting up a suitable repayment mortgage. Where this is the case, that part of the surrender value relating to the windfall augmentation should be paid as a cash lump sum to the investor or to the investor's order as part of the redress package. Only that part of the surrender value which does not relate to the windfall augmentation should be put towards the cost of setting up a suitable repayment mortgage.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.10

handbook-guidance
There may be some circumstances in which the policy will not be surrendered (see DISP App 2.2.15 G). In these cases, there is no requirement to pay the value of the windfall augmentation as a cash lump sum since the value of the augmentation will become payable when the policy matures. However, any fund value used in the calculation of redress payable should exclude the value of the windfall augmentation.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.11

handbook-guidance
Firms are entitled to mitigate losses by making use of the Traded Endowment Policy (TEP) market (see DISP App 2.3.8 G to DISP App 2.3.10 G). This allows firms to sell policies on the TEP market to meet the costs of redress, rather than using the surrender value. Where this method is adopted, firms should pay to the investor, as part of the redress package, a cash lump sum representing that proportion of the policy realised which would have related to the windfall augmentation.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.12

handbook-guidance
As this windfall amount should be excluded from the fund value used in the calculation of loss and redress it would also be appropriate for this extra payment to be ignored when assessing whether, "the net amount realised by the sale of the policy on the traded endowment market exceeds the total redress due to the complainant..." (DISP App 2.3.10 G).
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.13

handbook-guidance
There may be circumstances in which a policy needs to be reconstructed (see DISP 2.4). In carrying out the required reconstruction, the windfall augmentation should be ignored in both the existing and the revised policy. However, the policyholder's revised policy should be credited with any windfall augmentation which would have applied if the policy had been set up with the revised terms from the original date of advice. This enhancement can be taken into account in assessing a suitable level for future premiums, in line with DISP App 2.4.8 G.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.14

handbook-guidance
DISP App 2.5.10 G provides firms with the opinion of underpinning benefits. Firms should satisfy the FSA that their proposals provide complainants with a level of redress that is at least commensurate with the standard approaches and, to ensure consistency, windfall augmentations should be excluded when considering whether an underpin will apply. The FSA will take this into account when considering proposals put forward by firms.
  • 01/04/2002

DISP App 2.6.15

handbook-guidance
Product providers with windfall benefits in the form of policy augmentations should tell:
(1) their own relevant customers (mortgage endowment complainants); and
(2) other firms with such customers (and any other interested parties);
that they have excluded windfall augmentation benefits from values used or to be used for loss and redress. Firms should provide this information to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme when providing them with a value to be used for loss or redress. Should their own relevant customers, other firms with such customers (and any other interested parties) and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme request it, the firm should provide the value of these benefits and a description of the method used to exclude them.

Export chapter as

Transitional Provisions and Schedules

DISP TP 1

Transitional provisions

DISP TP 1.1

Transitional Provisions table

DISP TP 1.2

Table Fee tariffs for industry blocks

DISP TP 1.3

DISP Sch 1

Record keeping requirements

  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 1.1

handbook-guidance
  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 1.2

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 2

Notification requirements

  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 2.1

handbook-guidance
  • 01/04/2002

DISP Sch 2.1

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 3

Fees and other required payment

  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 3.1

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 3.2

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 4

Powers Exercised

  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 4.1

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 4.2

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 5

Actions for damages for contravention under section 150 of the Act

  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 5.1

handbook-guidance
  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 5.2

handbook-guidance

DISP Sch 6

Rules that can be waived

  • 01/12/2004

DISP Sch 6.1

handbook-guidance

Export chapter as

Back to top