Want to complain? Where do you go if there’s no ombudsman?

My experience is that Ombudsmen rarely settle anything but a reference to them usually puts organisations in the mood to come to a sensible settlement.

This is because they are an excellent way of taking organisations out of their comfort zones (AKA “Customer Services”

If no ombudsman exists other ways of doing this with large organisations are:-

1 Threatening to buy a share and raise the matter at the AGM. Some firms have a special list of small shareholders who are looked on as potential troublemakers.

2 Investing £1 in an online copy of the annual return from Companies House and writing to a non-executive director at his or her personal address. This gets matters dealt with at the top.

I have been going to these Ombudsmen & Commissions 1996 not once had a fair hearing they are usually funded by those they investigate so do not investigate fairly maladministrating .The Media & Consumer organisations have same unfair system as must know what is happening. I have lost £1000s as a result too find they even maladministrate appeals colluding .
Since deregulation this is only way to address matters as can’t even litigate even siding with legal services committing fraud .What do Government & elected representatitives do let admin pretend they are them to maladministrate further.
I never ever had a problem before there were Call centres & Managers & Head Offices with those not on procedures& remits could be contacted.. i used to sort things out in 10min – 1hr . Now they never sort out. Advice lines that set you up to be branded as vexatious litigant not able to access law is not acceptable. The above article is cloud cuckoo land.

An article at Lexology.com refers to the existence of ombudsman overlaps as well as gaps.

Perhaps Which? should address this as well?

An ombudsman’s decision isn’t legally binding and don’t be too surprised if decision arrived at is
inimical to the interests of you, the complainant and the consumer….. and then, and thereafter
if you’re still aggrieved, you SUE.

In cases where there are no adverse costs consequences, I shall always opt for a court of law at first
instance, mind you, resort to such a step also concentrates the mind of the other side wonderfully to settle…unlike a reference to the ombudsman.

Obviously not an option for everyone, least of all the faint-hearted.

This is a consumer website and I was, of course, referring to the consumer in what I wrote that I had made clear… but thanks for the enlightenment about the legally-binding effect on businesses of ombudsman’s decision. But businesses involved in a (serious) dispute usually litigate rather than submit to arbitration or to an ombudsman for that matter.

If I have a complaint about maladministration OR am dissatisfied with a decision adversely affecting either my personal or proprietary interests, I’d have thought it best such an issue be adjudicated upon by a court of law rather than by a mere layman of an ombudsman who is not at all qualified in the law let alone having the requisite judicial experience.

Fairly often and to give but an example, matters the subject of a grievance centres on the relevance, admissibility and/or construction of a clause in an insurance contract that I would feel far happier having it decided upon at first instance by a judge, whether at District or Circuit Bench level, if financial limits involved come within the jurisdiction of the County Court.