Gerry Horkan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I reiterate that there is no doubt that mediation is the best option. The amendment provides for an oral hearing only where a complainant makes a request. It does not force people into oral hearings they do not seek. While I agree that one should be careful what one wishes for in the sense that people should not take the oral hearing route if they do not know what is involved. The amendment is specific, however, and refers only to circumstances in which a complainant makes a request to hold an oral hearing. It does not force people who do not want an oral hearing to have one and it does not provide that the financial institutions can make the same request. If someone wishes to table an amendment to that effect, the House can consider it but that is not what the amendment is about.

The amendment refers to circumstances in which a complainant wants an oral hearing for whatever reason. He or she may want to feel his or her case is being given a hearing. People may have lost significant sums of money or their homes, for example, through changes in tracker mortgages. They may want a day to make their point as vociferously as they can. If the Financial Services Ombudsman decides against such a request, a hearing will not be held.

The amendment provides that an oral hearing must be held where the complainant makes such a request and a discrepancy arises. One could argue that there will always be a discrepancy but that it is not necessarily the case. People may agree the facts, even where they do not like the facts. The amendment only covers circumstances in which there is a discrepancy between the accounts of events between the parties. I presume the Financial Services Authority would be the arbiter of whether there is a discrepancy.

No one is being forced into an oral hearing and anyone who believes that is my intention should read the amendment carefully. It states specifically that where "a complainant has made a request to hold an oral hearing, and where there is a discrepancy in the account of events between the parties that is fundamental to arriving at a conclusion, the Financial Service Ombudsman shall be obliged to hold an oral hearing". The amendment arose from the Free Legal Advice Centres report, Redressing the Imbalance. It does not make an oral hearing mandatory but gives a little less discretion to the Financial Services Ombudsman and a little more power to the consumer. I reiterate that mediation is a better option but that may not always be possible, nor will it always be the solution.