FOS Still Doesn’t Understand GAP Insurance — And Consumers Are Paying the Price We continue to educate the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) as a result of its troubling lack of understanding of GAP insurance complaints, particularly where GAP was financed through a lender and the underlying finance agreement is (or was) subject to a discretionary […]

Six Months. Eighty Percent. And the Slow Erosion of Trust at the Financial Ombudsman Service. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) exists for one reason, to provide an independent, fair resolution when a financial firm and its customer cannot agree. That “fair and reasonable” promise is the entire point of the institution. So when FOS publicly […]

Re-educating FOS on GAP: “Demands & Needs” Isn’t Optional There’s a moment in far too many of our GAP insurance cases where the conversation stops being about the consumer’s complaint and starts becoming a tutorial. Not for the dealership. For the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). We find ourselves having to explain and again that a […]

Financial Ombudsman Service: transparency denied to the public The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) positions itself as the independent referee consumers can trust when financial firms get it wrong. It expects businesses to engage, disclose, and explain, and it expects consumers to accept outcomes as “fair and reasonable”. So why, when asked perfectly reasonable questions under […]