by Daniel Smith
The inconsistencies relate to jurisdictional rules, which govern what complaints the schemes can consider, and limitations on the redress schemes can award.
Some in the industry have stated that these issues have impacted the overall accessibility to the schemes by consumers.
The four schemes are the Banking Ombudsman, the Insurance and Financial Services Ombudsman, Financial Services Complaints Ltd (currently petitioning for the title ombudsman) and the Financial Dispute Resolution Service.
Each resolution service has its own rules which govern how they resolve disputes between members and consumers.
Susan Taylor, CEO of Financial Services Complaints Ltd, told Good Returns that FSCL is supportive of the government review.
“We agree it is important that there is consistency between the schemes’ rules and support the Ministry’s desire to promote fair and effective access to justice for consumers by standardising some scheme rules through regulation.”
The review, which is open to public submissions until May 6, 2021, covers four key issues:
● the financial limits for hearing a claim
● limits on compensation that can be awarded
● jurisdictional time frames for being a scheme member
● time frames for bringing a claim.
MBIE says a discussion about combining the four schemes into one large dispute resolution body, like has been done in Australia, is outside the scope of its review.
| « Why PI insurance premiums are rising | Mann on a mission to diversify financial advice » |
Special Offers
No comments yet
Sign In to add your comment
© Copyright 1997-2024 Tarawera Publishing Ltd. All Rights Reserved