Does the Financial Ombudsman have any jurisdiction over liquidated banks?
Does anyone know about whether the Financial Omubudsman still has some limited jurisdiction over liquidated banks?
I presume that any matters of conflict with liquidated banks would have to be settled in a law court but I was wondering whether the Financial Ombudsman still has some jurisdiction, especially if the issue arose before the bank became liquidated.
Does anyone know?
Apologies if this seems a stupid and naive question, I must admit a high degree of ignorance in these matters.
Many thanks,
Sheffield25
There is no independent ombudsman in the IoM !
The ombudsman scheme in the IoM is window dressing. The Scheme operates under the aegis of the government's Office of Fair Trading and mainly deals with issues of complaint about goods & services. If a complaint is received & a decision to act on it is made then the Department will nominate someone to be 'ombudsman'. In other words it is not an independent service.
Anything involving goods/services in value greater than £5000 will involve the complainant employing a lawyer.
As for KSFIOM, here is the cop-out whereby you can't complain:
•we think the supplier has already made a fair offer of compensation
•the complaint has or is being considered by any court or another dispute resolution scheme
The IoM Ombudsman Scheme is here:
http://www.gov.im/oft/ombudsman/
Independent ombudsman in the IoM ! - Correction
Jim,
I don't understand your comment that its not an independent service
Without knowing the nature of the complaint how on earth can you make such statements?
The complaint may be about, and I choose an example, correspondence going to an incorrect address.
In this case the two "cop outs" as you say don't apply.
The inference that an award cannot be made over £5K is just plainly incorrect.
Much like your comment "The DCS won't cost the IOM a penny" please check your facts before posting.
@manx-person
Reply:
The ombudsman service is provided by a government department and any ombudsman appointed for a specific purpose is paid for by the government. Thus it is not independent (eg: a complaint can not be made against a government department);
my response was to the issue as to whether the ombudman had any juirisdiciton in liquidation of the bank. The answer to that is 'no' for the reasons I cited;
I did not infer anything. The scheme makes it clear that claims in excess of £5K would require a complainant pursuing the case before the court with obligatory legal representation;
there is no evidence to date that the DCS is going to cost the government a penny other than loss of interest on the money ''borrowed' from reserves. The intention is that the £195million now being put 'up front' from reserves will be recovered ultimately from the assets of the bank. I have it in writing that in respect of KSFIOM the 'levy' on the banks will not be a 'charge' on them but a 'borrowing' with the sum borrowed being repaid from recovered assets of the bank.
Factual inaccuracies