SHARPER TEETH: THE CONSUMER NEED FOR OMBUDSMAN REFORM. An analysis by The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign (1) Page 2:

SHARPER TEETH: THE CONSUMER NEED FOR OMBUDSMAN REFORM - An Analysis By The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign (1) Page 2. "An ombudsman’s job is to resolve complaints, effectively operating as a final referee between the complainant and the body being complained about. This is a crucial role for consumer protection. This report shows that the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) landscape that ombudsmen exist within is a complex maze, full of inconsistencies. Ombudsmen are not equal. Despite sharing a name, ombudsmen have different powers, and vary widely in effectiveness. Key areas where ombudsmen differ include whether membership is compulsory, whether firms can be forced to cooperate, and what happens if companies do not comply. Much of this discrepancy comes from whether or not the ombudsman in question has some form of statutory basis. Many do not. This uneven provision results in some consumers having positive experiences with ombudsmen, but for too many it is a frustrating waste of time. This was shown in our consumer survey results. Respondents self-selected to take part in the survey, so it is to be expected that the results would be a little more negative than in a non-self-selecting poll (as people who have a complaint to make were more likely to participate). Despite this, the results were stark: • Our survey identified serious issues with firms not cooperating with ombudsmen and complying with their decisions (although ombudsmen gave a different view). Consumer responses indicated that the Financial Ombudsman Service’s decisions are most likely to actually be put into action. • The perception of impartiality was called into question by our survey, which found that the majority – 60% – thought the ombudsman was biased against them; 8% thought the ombudsman was biased towards them; and only 31% said the ombudsman was neutral." We agree with MSE that ombudsman "impartiality" is a crucial problem. But it is something the report does not examine or explain. In their second Customer Satisfaction Report for Ombudsman Services, DJS Research reported that 61% thought the ombudsman's decision went against them. Hence - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign. This figure rose to 84% (as recorded on page 60 of this report). Again, this startling statistic is left unexplained. "• For only one ombudsman surveyed did the majority of respondents say that the decisionwas fair; for all others, more than 50% of their users said that the decision was unfair." ISSUES: * Ombudsman as referee. Many referees simply aren't up to the job. This report simply avoids examining the reasons why ombudsmen are "unfair." * Who ARE ombudsmen accountable to and why are they NOT being held to account for their "unfairness?"