Written by For many consumers embroiled in disputes with financial businesses, the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) may appear as the last port of call—a complex, bureaucratic maze where cases are often protracted and complainants left unheard. Headlines are frequently dominated by stories of frustration and procedural failings, including many I have covered through Legal Lens. Yet it is equally important to highlight occasions when the system gets it right.
Who Are They?
The Financial Ombudsman Service has been resolving complaints between financial businesses and their customers since it was established by Parliament in 2001. As a free service, the FOS assists over one million people each year with issues ranging from bank accounts, payments and cards, payment protection insurance, and various forms of insurance (including home, car and travel), to loans, debt collection, mortgages, financial advice, investments and pensions. If the FOS determines that you have been treated unfairly, it has the power to put things right. Designed to help individuals, micro-enterprises, small businesses, and some charities and trusts, the FOS offers a no-cost alternative to costly legal representation.
An Impartial and Thorough Investigation
From the outset, my case was assigned to a very diligent and responsive investigator at the FOS. What immediately impressed me was the professionalism and methodical approach that characterised the entire process. Although the initial findings did not meet my expectations, the investigator remained open to further evidence and reassessment—a far cry from a mere box-ticking exercise.
When I raised concerns about Moneybarn’s communication practices and their failure to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010, the investigator not only acknowledged the new evidence I provided but also proactively sought clarification from Moneybarn. This balanced approach—firmly scrutinising the financial firm’s claims while maintaining impartiality—was particularly refreshing when compared to other organisations I deal with.
Acknowledging Shortfalls Without Defensiveness
Crucially, the FOS did not hesitate to admit when things had gone awry. After considering the additional evidence, the investigator candidly recognised that Moneybarn had failed to meet its obligations, especially in handling reasonable adjustment requests. Such accountability is rare and merits genuine recognition.
Furthermore, Moneybarn’s eventual concession—confirming in writing that my outstanding balance had been written off and that the vehicle was legally mine—was a direct result of the FOS’s diligent and persistent engagement.
When Redress Feels Meaningful
Although financial compensation was not the ultimate aim of my complaint, the resolution provided a welcome sense of peace, clarity, and closure. What mattered most was being heard, having my concerns validated, and witnessing a financial institution held to account. In an era when dispute resolution bodies are frequently criticised for being ineffective or out of touch, my experience stands as a reminder that the system can work when individuals within it are truly committed to fairness, diligence, and transparency.
A Call for Balanced Reporting
At Legal Lens, we are not shy about criticising institutions when they fall short. However, integrity also requires us to acknowledge when those same bodies deliver. My experience with the Financial Ombudsman Service is a testament to the fact that, while the system is not perfect, there are dedicated professionals who genuinely strive for justice.
This service, accessible and free to all, reinforces the principle that every consumer’s complaint matters. My experience has not only restored some of my faith in the complaints process but also challenged my own biases as a commentator on dispute resolution. I hope that by sharing this story—and an understanding of the FOS’s vital role—I can offer a more balanced view of the system and provide reassurance to others navigating similar disputes.