Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

261. To ask the Minister for Finance the main reasons for a significant number of rejections of consumer complaints by the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (details supplied). [9771/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

The FSPO has informed me that every complaint received by it is assessed and investigated in detail. Where a complaint closes in Registration and Assessment or in Legal Services, these complaints have been subject to an in-depth assessment.

Complaints that close in Registration and Assessment will be closed for a number of reasons. In 2020, 465 complaints were closed because they were found to be ineligible. This was mainly because these complaints were related to products, services, or service providers that do not fall within the remit of the FSPO, not enough information was provided by the complainant to proceed, the complaint was appropriate for another Ombudsman, or the complaint was deemed withdrawn because the complainant did not engage in any further communication.

There were 327 files closed following a detailed Early Jurisdictional Assessment service, where these complaints fell outside the remit of the FSPO due to jurisdictional issues. These included complaints that do not meet the time limits for bringing a complaint to the FSPO, where the complaint has been, or is the subject of legal proceedings, where fraud has been alleged or where the complaint is more suitably dealt with by a different forum.

Complaints will also be closed in Registration and Assessment when the FSPO engages directly with the financial service provider or pension provider, in order to secure a final response to the complaint for the consumer. This allows the complaint to close if the complainants are satisfied with their provider’s final response.

Where an issue arises, which requires a more detailed legal assessment, the matter is referred to the Legal Services Unit for a formal jurisdictional assessment to determine whether the complaint, or elements of the complaint, can proceed to investigation. The FSPO makes every effort to assist the parties in understanding the extent and limits of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. The parties to the complaint will be invited to make submissions during the assessment process, before the final determination on jurisdiction is ultimately confirmed to the parties. 536 complaints were closed following this detailed legal assessment. The total number of complaints closed during 2020 was 6,193 which occurred at various stages of the complaint management lifecycle, as detailed below.

An additional 561 complaints that were ineligible were closed in 2020. Ineligible complaints include those for providers outside Ireland, for services that are not financial services, or duplicate complaints.

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

262. To ask the Minister for Finance if the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman is taking the position in many cases that the consumer should have been aware of misconduct (details supplied) when they signed a loan offer or when they first went into default on a loan. [9772/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

The FSPO has informed me that it can investigate complaints made about the conduct of financial service providers and pension providers, only if such complaints are made within the time limits prescribed by the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017 (‘the Act’).

The Act further requires that where a question arises as to whether the Ombudsman has jurisdiction to investigate a complaint, including in relation to time limits, the question must be determined by the Ombudsman. Any jurisdictional determination, including in relation to time limits, is made by the Ombudsman on the basis of an in-depth assessment of the evidence available regarding the complaint, to ensure that the provisions of the Act are observed. The Ombudsman must at all times act within the limits of the governing legislation. 

In July 2017, legislative changes were made to the time limits for making complaints to the FSPO’s predecessor, the Financial Services Ombudsman’s Bureau. This introduced additional time limits for complaints about the conduct of financial service providers, in respect of a “long-term financial service". These expanded time limits were included in the Act, which commenced in January 2018, when the FSPO came into existence.

Section 51 of the Act, governing time limits, prescribes that any complaint about a "long-term financial service", can be made not only within a period of six years of the date of the conduct complained of, but also within a period of three years of a certain "date of knowledge" as prescribed within the Act. In addition, the Ombudsman has a statutory discretion, regarding such complaints, to extend the time where there are reasonable grounds for requiring a longer period and it would be just and equitable in all the circumstances to do so.

Section 2 of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017 originally prescribed that a “long-term financial service” essentially constituted:

(a) a product or service with a fixed term of 5 years and 1 month or more, or

(b) life assurance.

The definition of long term financial service was further refined in 2018 to ensure greater protections for consumers, such that the definition now includes the following provision:-

“Notwithstanding the fact that the financial service does not fix its duration to be of a term such as is referred to in paragraph (a) of the definition of ‘long-term financial service’ in subsection (1), a financial service shall be regarded as falling within that definition if it would be reasonable for a consumer to expect its duration to be of at least the length referred to in that paragraph and that reasonable expectation arises by reason of—

(a) the manner in which the financial service operates to provide a financial benefit to the consumer,

(b) the type of assets with which its operation is connected, or

(c) representations made by the financial service provider, as distinct from where such an expectation arises in the case of

(i) a current account with a financial institution, or

(ii) any other financial service of an indefinite duration that is widely available and does not possess specialised characteristics.”

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

263. To ask the Minister for Finance the reason the Financial and Pensions Ombudsman is refusing to investigate complaints unless both parties to a joint and several accounts have signed the complaint form. [9773/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

The FSPO has informed me that where a complaint is made to the FSPO concerning a joint account or a joint policy, the FSPO must recognise that all parties who own that account or policy have rights, entitlements and potential liabilities arising in relation to such an account or policy, and in addition certain data protection issues arise.

Whether the complaint is settled by way of agreement between the parties, using the confidential Dispute Resolution Service of the FSPO, or is the subject of a formal investigation by the FSPO, leading to a legally binding decision, the rights and obligations of all joint account holders or joint policyholders are thereby affected. All owners of the account or policy must be agreeable to the investigation of the complaint by the FSPO, and the processing of their personal data by the FSPO. Therefore, the signature of each joint owner of the policy or account is required as evidence of their consent.

The FSPO must respect the rights and entitlements of allparties to an account or policy. It cannot give preference to the position of one account or policyholder, over the other joint owner/s.

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

264. To ask the Minister for Finance if he will report on the circa 1,200 tracker case complaints outstanding with the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman; the actions that have been taken to ensure that the backlog is cleared; and if he authorised the Ombudsman to employ additional internal and external resources to deal with this matter. [9774/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

The FSPO’s predecessor, the Financial Services Ombudsman Bureau, started receiving tracker mortgage rate complaints in 2009, and these complaints have continued to be received over the last twelve years.

The FSPO has informed me that at end 2021, 1,115 complaints on hand at the FSPO were identified as being Tracker Mortgage Interest Rate Related, of which 1,017 were classified as active complaints. During 2021, 257 new tracker mortgage interest rate related complaints were received by the FSPO Office, with a further 29 tracker mortgage complaints reopened during the year.

370 tracker mortgage interest rate complaints were closed during 2021. The breakdown of these closures is set out below.

These complaints continue to comprise a considerable portion of the work of the FSPO and progress through both the informal Dispute Resolution process and the formal Investigation process of the FSPO. The duration required to investigate a complaint can vary depending on the complexity of the file and the number of submissions made by the parties to the complaint.

The FSPO continues to require the services of its tracker mortgage team comprising a team of solicitors, trainee solicitors, paralegals and legal executives who are working full time within the FSPO to deal with these cases. These staff provide legal advice and investigation support services for complaints received from consumers regarding tracker mortgages, which are not resolved by mediation and require a full investigation leading to the issue of a legally binding decision.

The FSPO and its Council continue to monitor the FSPO’s operating environment, monitoring emerging demands for its services and identifying resource and skills needs, as they arise.

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

265. To ask the Minister for Finance if additional resources required by the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman to deal with consumer complaints are met by the levy on the industry generating the complaints. [9775/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

The FSPO has informed me that in accordance with the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017 (‘the Act’), the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Council approves the FSPO’s annual budget of operating costs.

This annual budget is funded through two distinct sources in accordance with the Act; financial services complaints are funded by a levy on the financial services industry and pension complaints are funded by the Exchequer. The apportionment of the annual budget is based upon the complaints received in the previous three-year period in respect of pensions and financial services and therefore reflects the most recent complaints handling experience. Any increase or decrease in particular categories of complaints will be reflected in the amount of the financial services industry levy due to be paid by firms within that category.

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

266. To ask the Minister for Finance if is satisfied with the resources employed by the Office of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman; and his views on the staff numbers per million of population compared to resources employed by the UK Financial Services Ombudsman. [9776/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

In December 2018, the FSPO submitted a Workforce Plan 2019-2023 to me and I approved the recruitment of an additional 35 staff. This basis for the additional headcount was approved due to the rising number of complaints made to the FSPO and the increasing complexity of many of these complaints, which is an appropriate way to determine the resourcing requirement of the organisation.

The FSPO and its Council continue to monitor the FSPO’s operating environment, monitoring emerging demands for its services and identifying resource and skills needs, as they arise. The FSPO supports the ongoing development of its workforce and places a strong emphasis on continuous professional development to support the delivery of its functions, as set out in its establishing legislation.

Mairead Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

267. To ask the Minister for Finance the reason the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman spent a total of €1.8 million on legal fees in 2020. [9777/22]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy is aware, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) is independent in the performance of her statutory functions and I have no role in the day to day workings of the office or in the decisions which she takes.

As the FSPO is a statutory complaints handling body its functions require the ongoing provision of legal services. The FSPO has informed me that the figure of €1.8 million incurred by the FSPO on legal fees, as detailed in its Annual Financial Statements 2020, includes expenditure relating to the management of a number of Judicial Review applications to the High Court and statutory appeals by parties following the issuing of a Legally Binding Decision of the FSPO.

It also includes the ongoing provision of the FSPO’s tracker mortgage team comprising a team of solicitors, trainee solicitors, paralegals and legal executives who are working full time within the FSPO, providing legal advice and investigation support services for complaints received from consumers regarding tracker mortgages, which are not resolved by mediation and require a full investigation leading to the issue of a legally binding decision. The expenditure also includes corporate legal fees.

All expenditure by the FSPO is provided for through its annual budget process, as outlined in the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017.