I have pursued several disputes with the Ombudsman Service, and it became evident that they do not adhere to consumer law, despite their claims of impartiality. Staff members informed me that they do not enforce the Consumer Rights Act 2015, stating, “they are not a court,” which was reflected in their decisions. In my first case, I received a replacement phone that arrived with a cracked camera. I reported this immediately, with the phone unused and still in its protective packaging. According to Section 19(14) of the CRA 2015, when a fault is reported within six months, the insurer must demonstrate that the item was undamaged upon delivery. Instead, the Ombudsman shifted the burden of proof onto me, merely accepting the insurer’s internal photos as evidence. A court would have dismissed this outright.
In my second case, my No Claims Bonus was unjustly reduced from 18 years to 4. The insurer’s terms were ambiguous, and consumer contract law dictates that such ambiguity should favor the consumer. The Ombudsman disregarded this, claiming they had a better understanding of the insurer’s explanation. In my third case regarding car valuation, I provided independent market evidence demonstrating my car’s rarity and actual selling prices. The insurer relied on their own contracted “expert,” whom the Ombudsman regarded as neutral. A court later determined the insurer was incorrect, and I won. Regarding the Ombudsman’s behavior, in multiple instances, they introduced new reasons to deny my claims that the insurer had never mentioned. When I highlighted relevant laws, they dismissed my points and upheld their caseworker’s opinion. The final responses felt predetermined and lacked references to the laws designed to protect consumers. In conclusion, two cases that the Ombudsman rejected have already been overturned in Small Claims Court, and I anticipate the same outcome for my final case. From my experience, the Ombudsman does not apply consumer law, lacks impartiality, and often defaults in favor of insurers. Many current caseworkers at the Ombudsman are inexperienced and have not previously worked in legal roles. Historically, final decisions by the Ombudsman would often overturn caseworker decisions, but now, most cases appear to be rubber-stamped, relying on templates or personal opinions rather than legal principles. If your situation hinges on the law, you would be better off going directly to Small Claims Court. It’s amusing that they don’t allow feedback on their website; otherwise, I would not have hesitated to bring my case to them. A complete waste of time!
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
We were set up by Parliament to resolve individual complaints between financial businesses and their customers. We can look into problems involving most types of money matters - from payday loans to pensions, pet insurance to PPI. If we decide someone's been treated unfairly, we have legal powers to put things right.