Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Original poster

Financial Services Ombudsman/Judicial review/Where is my money??

28 replies

Norton · 31/10/2005 17:22

Hi I have been involved in a long running dispute about a Permanent Health Insurance claim.

The FSO made a decision in my favour 5 weeks ago.

However the company has not paid us any money yet.

The FSO is very shocked that they haven't paid and the chap I soke to didn't know what to do if a FSO ruling was ignored (he is going to find out). They should have paid within 4 weeks

The company is talking about a Judicial Review and refusing to pay

What is going to happen now??

OP posts:
Freckle · 31/10/2005 18:23

So sorry to hear that the company are still playing silly b&ggers. What was the final ruling of the FSO? Was the decision accepted by both you and the company at the time?

katymac · 31/10/2005 18:28

There was a big meeting and after that meeting a decision was made (I understood this to have been thrashed out and agreed between FSO & the co). We were told the decision and we had to sign to say we agreed (from the FSO) which we signed.

Then the FSO said they should contact us within 4 weeks - we got a holding letter 10 days ago - the 4 weeks were up a week ago today.

Who knows what happens now and when we might get the money - I thought the FSO was the final bit - but apparently it might not be

Freckle · 31/10/2005 18:31

If the company agreed to the decision, it is binding on them. Surprised that the person at the FSo didn't know what the next step might be.

katymac · 31/10/2005 18:33

He said he has never known a company (who agreed to abide by the decision) not abide by it.

He isn't sure it has happened before.......

katymac · 31/10/2005 18:38

I am so crap at being anonymous

Bu&&er

I give up

Freckle · 31/10/2005 18:44

I know there is the option of going for a judicial review, but thought that was only for the individual who disagreed with the FSO's decision, not the company.

Have you had a look at the FSO's website, in case there are any pointers on there?

katymac · 31/10/2005 19:44

Apparently it can be for the company as well

However it appears that their decisions are rarely overturned

How much longer will this go on for

I thought it was all sorted once the decision was made

katymac · 31/10/2005 20:30

I can't find a website for the company

I'm really worried that we are stuffed

katymac · 31/10/2005 20:50

It says this on the website

You do not have to accept any decision we make - you are always free to go to court instead. But if you do accept an ombudsman's decision, it is binding on both you and the firm.

SO WHERE'S MY MONEY

bubbaloo · 01/11/2005 18:30

If it's any consolation I sued Abbey via the Ombudsman and won my case.
It took a while for me to get my money-probably about 6 weeks,so maybe give it another 7-10 days and then perhaps contact the FSO if you still haven't heard anything.

Twiglett · 01/11/2005 18:33

but if it is binding it is binding

its not bloody rocket science

am sorry this is still going on norton / katy

Freckle · 01/11/2005 19:01

Have you heard back from the FSO?

The next step might be to issue proceedings in the county court, which entitles you to claim interest on any monies due in addition to the amount owed. The FSO's original decision would go heavily in your favour.

katymac · 01/11/2005 19:14

I got this back from the big guy at the ombudsman

We will look into this and let you know what is going on as soon as possible. Hopefully, it's just an admin error. Please try not to worry.

Yours sincerely

I eamiled him as the chap I deal with is away today

Kelly1978 · 01/11/2005 19:40

Can you not ask the company on what grounds the company is considering applying for judical review?
I def wouldn't panick yet, there application for a review might not even be granted, the review won't necessarily overturn the decision, even if it does agree with the grounds of review. They are prob jsut messing around and will pay up soon.

Kelly1978 · 01/11/2005 19:40

Can you not ask the company on what grounds the company is considering applying for judical review?
I def wouldn't panick yet, there application for a review might not even be granted, the review won't necessarily overturn the decision, even if it does agree with the grounds of review. They are prob jsut messing around and will pay up soon.

katymac · 01/11/2005 19:59

Kelly1978 - I don't even know what a Judicial review is....do you?

katymac · 01/11/2005 22:27

Bump to see if anyone knows what a Judicial review is?

Freckle · 01/11/2005 23:12

Judicial review is the procedure which allows the High Court to review decisions made by public bodies.

The procedure can be used where:-

an official or body has acted in a way that no reasonable official or body should have acted - see; or

an official or body has acted in a way that exceeds its powers (ultra vires); or

an official or body has failed to perform a mandatory public duty; or

an official or body has misunderstood or misinterpreted the law or its own legal powers (error of law). This can include failing to give adequate reason for a decision where there is a duty to do so or introducing a policy which has no statutory basis; or

a decision was taken without a party having the opportunity to present her/his case (breach of natural justice); or

a decision taken by an official or body was biased, for example, where one of the parties making the decision had a direct financial interest, or had prejudged the case (breach of natural justice); or

an official or body has exercised its discretion improperly, for example, it has failed to take account of relevant matters or took into account irrelevant matters, or a decision was taken without supporting evidence; or

an official or body did not make a decision when it should have done so, for example, it only followed an existing policy without taking into account the merits of an individual case; or

there is incompatibility with European law (especially where the actions of the official or body are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights or the Human Rights Act 1998).

katymac · 02/11/2005 07:47

Blimey - Thanks Freckle (sorry I went to bed last night)

I'm not a lawyer neither do I have any sort of legal brain, but as far as I'm concerned the FO did the only thing it could have done.

Don't know where that leaves us.....apart from without money

Do they have to be "allowed" to do a judicial review or can they just do one 'cos they want to?

Freckle · 02/11/2005 08:21

I think they have to apply for one, but it may not be granted, in which case they are stuck with the FSO's decision.

katymac · 02/11/2005 08:27

That's good - with any luck they won't be allowed to have one.

I don't want them to be allowed to have one

Kelly1978 · 02/11/2005 09:27

they do have to apply for the court to have one, and within 60 days of the decision I think. There are extensive grounds for judical review and conditions which have to be satisfied before a judical review is granted. It is pretty complex.

Judical review has to be on the basis that freckle outlined - you cant get a judical review jsut because you don't agree with the decision made. JR is completely different to appeal. A JR will not substitute the original decision made. they may quash it, or issue a prohibting or madatory order.

hope you get your moeny soon.

tatt · 02/11/2005 10:08

I'm not a lawyer but I do know a little bit about judicial review (long story). Basically the courts are VERY reluctant to overturn a decision made by any of the Ombudsmen like bodies because those bodies were established by Parliament and given powers similar to judges. Even if they were allowed to have a judicial review (and the courts quite often refuse applications) the courts will only overturn the decision if it was one no reasonable person could have reached. The courts have failed to overturn a decision even when the judge said it wasn't one he would have reached - and any half sane person would have said they should. If the company actually said they would abide by it and then had second thoughts they have no chance of getting the decision overturned. Time limits for applying for judicial review are extremely tight, although I forget exactly how many months - may be 3. In the unlikely event that they won the Ombudsman would have to decide again. They can - and have - taken the same decision a second time. Unless there are vast sums of money involved it is just not worth the company challenging the decision.

So I wouldn't woory about getting your money - and you'll get interest if they delay.

katymac · 02/11/2005 18:46

Thanks for all that info - it looks like I have a lot of research to do

katymac · 03/11/2005 18:11

I got this email today

Dear Mrs "Katymac"
I have heard from the firm.

As I suspected, the firm has indicated that it will comply with my decision and the delay has just been due to internal processes. You should hear from the firm in the next week or so. I awarded you interest on the settlement, so this will take account of the delays.

Yours sincerely

Ombudsman