Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen debate -
Thursday, 4 May 2023

Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Annual Report 2021 and Related Matters: Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman

I welcome all the members and note that Senator Cummins is deputising for Senator Lombard. I welcome everyone to the meeting. Apologies have been received from Senator Craughwell. All those present in the committee room are asked to exercise personal responsibility to protect themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19.

The first business is to approve the minutes of the private and public meetings of 19 and 20 April 2023. Those minutes have already been approved in a virtual private meeting but we must do this now for procedural reasons. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I will now read some formal notices. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place where Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she is not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

Our next business is our engagement with Mr. Liam Sloyan, Financial Services Pensions Ombudsman and Ms MaryRose McGovern, deputy financial services and pensions ombudsman. They are here to discuss the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman, FSPO, annual report for 2021 and other related matters. Before we start, I will explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or to otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in regard to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Before we hear from our witnesses, I propose that we publish the opening statement on the committee's website. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On behalf of the committee, I extend a warm welcome to Mr. Sloyan and McGovern. Mr. Sloyan will read out his opening statement - I suggest it lasts around ten minutes - which will be followed by questions and comments from members. I ask each member to ensure their comments only last ten minutes in order that members can speak a second time.

I invite Mr. Sloyan to make his opening statement.

Mr. Liam Sloyan

If it is in order, I might shorten my statement and ask that parts of it are taken as read because I believe my statement would go over ten minutes. Is that okay?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I thank the committee for inviting us here today for what is my first time attending since I was appointed Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman last December. I am joined by my colleague, Ms MaryRose McGovern, deputy financial services and pensions ombudsman. Together, we look forward to engaging with the committee on any queries from members.

On the background of the FSPO and its role, it was established in January 2018 by the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017. The role of the FSPO is to resolve complaints from consumers, including small businesses and other organisations, against financial service providers and pension providers. The FSPO provides an independent, fair, impartial, confidential and free service to resolve complaints through either informal mediation, leading to a potential settlement agreed between the parties, or formal investigation and adjudication, leading to a legally binding decision. In delivering this important role, the FSPO has a real impact on the lives of people who use our services and on the market environment.

Any consumers, whether individuals, small businesses or organisations, that are unable to resolve a complaint or dispute with a financial service or pension provider can refer their complaint to the FSPO. Complaints are dealt with by the FSPO informally at first, by listening to both parties and engaging with them to facilitate a resolution that is acceptable to both. Much of this informal engagement takes place by telephone. Where these early interventions do not resolve the dispute, the FSPO formally investigates the complaint and issues a decision that is legally binding on both parties, subject only to a statutory appeal to the High Court.

The Oireachtas has given me wide-ranging powers to deal with complaints against financial service providers. I can look beyond the contractual terms and consider the fairness and reasonableness of the conduct complained of.

I can direct compensation of up to €500,000 and direct a provider to rectify the conduct that is the subject of the complaint, noting that there is no limit on the value of the rectification.

In addition, every spring I publish a summary of all complaints received during the previous calendar year, together with trends and statistical analysis. That is done within my statutory overview of complaints. My overview of complaints for 2022 was published on 24 March, setting out these details, together with a breakdown of the methods used to resolve complaints during 2022 and the outcomes achieved. My overview also included my report on the names of any financial service provider that had at least three complaints against it upheld, substantially upheld or partially upheld during 2022.

My statutory powers also include the publication of anonymised decisions issued in complaints about the conduct of financial service providers, which I will refer to in more detail later.

When dealing with complaints against pensions providers, the legislation empowers me to direct redress. Such redress, however, cannot exceed any actual loss of benefit under the pension scheme concerned. As regards pension complaints, I can publish anonymised case studies.

I will talk a little about how we deliver for our customers. The important statutory role of this office provides consumers, including small businesses, with an avenue of redress in sometimes challenging and difficult circumstances where their complaints remain unresolved. Against that background, this office strives to provide the best possible services to all our customers and to manage effectively and efficiently every complaint we receive. People's experiences are at the core of our service, and the hallmark of our success is to manage complaints in line with our values and dedication to public service.

The overview of complaints 2022 includes an analysis of all complaints made, a review of trends and patterns in the making of complaints and a breakdown of the method by which complaints were dealt with during that year. I have attached some publications, including the 2022 overview of complaints, to this opening statement for ease of reference.

During 2022 this office continued to process high numbers of complaints, with 4,781 complaints received. The FSPO closed 4,647 complaints in the same period and delivered impactful outcomes for our customers, including financial outcomes totalling over €5 million for individual complainants. Of the complaints closed in 2022, 28% included an element of poor customer service from providers. This is a disappointing increase on what was already a significant volume in 2021, at 23% of complaints. Customer service issues can include a provider's failure to provide information, complaint handling issues or accessibility and communication issues. The financial outcomes mentioned above do not include the very significant redress by rectification secured by complainants through a legally binding decision. That is in addition to the €5 million to which I referred earlier.

Mediation facilitated by the FSPO continues to be an attractive informal option for our customers, both complainants and providers, in order that they themselves can design a suitable resolution to the complaint which is mutually acceptable, without the need for the FSPO to undertake a formal investigation. It is also clear to me that many complaints that we received in 2022 could, and indeed should, have been resolved without the need for a complainant to engage with my office. During 2022 some 45% of complaints I received were resolved at a very early stage, during the registration and assessment process. Taking those early resolutions and additional mediated settlements together, 82% of complaints resolved during 2022 achieved a resolution without the need for a legal assessment of eligibility and without the need for a legally binding decision.

The FSPO's annual report in 2021 reflects the framework of our strategic plan, which covers the period 2021-24. The plan builds on the FSPO's delivery in its first three years of operation following its establishment in 2018. Under that plan and the preceding plan, the FSPO has successfully concluded 25,801 complaints over the past five years. The priorities outlined in our strategy reflect both the FSPO's statutory role and its values and reflect our ambition to evolve and innovate our services and focus on customers, external stakeholders and audiences.

One aspect of our role in this framework is to encourage the resolution of complaints at the earliest and most appropriate stage and to help raise standards in complaints handling and resolution by providers of financial services and pensions products through their own internal dispute resolution processes.

In implementing our strategic priority of sharing and influencing, the potential to resolve complaints at an earlier stage has been highlighted to our stakeholders and to those working in the industry in order to encourage a more responsive service from providers, which could prevent such complaints arising, very much to everyone's benefit.

We are proactive in our commitment to engage with and keep informed the Government, regulators and policymakers, highlighting trends and systemic issues arising from complaint outcomes. To that end, during 2021, this office formally referred 13 legally binding decisions in financial service complaints to the Central Bank of Ireland, CBI, and two complaints to the Pensions Authority, while in 2022 ten decisions were referred to the CBI. This is an important part of our role, and these referrals, in addition to the ongoing sharing of information with the regulatory authorities on areas of mutual interest, help to ensure that issues and conducts evident in complaints made to this office can be considered from a regulatory perspective. Areas of mutual interest include tracker mortgage interest rate-related decisions and business interruption-related decisions. To that end, we shared 134 tracker mortgage-related decisions and 19 business interruption-related decisions with the CBI in 2022.

The Oireachtas has granted this office the power to publish anonymised legally binding decisions regarding complaints against financial services providers. To date, more than 2,000 such decisions have been published and are available online through the FSPO website, thereby offering an insight into my approach to issues raised by such complaints. The database offers search facilities to select decisions by product, by sector and by outcome.

We periodically publish themed digests of decisions to highlight a particular product or issue to the public, such as the digest of travel insurance decisions and the digest of health insurance decisions published during 2022. There are now eight digests of decisions available on the FSPO website as a permanent resource to the public. During 2021, in our February digest, we highlighted the wide range of banking, insurance and pension-related issues giving rise to complaints to the FSPO. In July 2021 we focused on complaints made by businesses, including 12 decisions relating to business interruption insurance. It was clear in those decisions that the circumstances surrounding Covid-19-related business interruption claims were exceptionally difficult for many of those businesses that brought their complaints to us, with impacts including the loss of ability to trade, loss of stock and loss of rental income. The publication of anonymised decisions and of the digests of decisions ensure that the legally binding decisions of this office are accessible to the widest possible audience and that the issues leading to complaints to this office are highlighted to consumers, financial service providers and policymakers.

In 2021, to deliver on our ambitious strategic plan and, in particular, our commitment to continue to adapt and evolve our service to both anticipate and respond to the changing needs and expectations of all our customers, we carried out internal and external consultation to develop our customer charter and our new customer action plan. Those shape the standard of service and behaviour that should underpin the FSPO's interactions with all customers. Our revised action plan and charter were published in 2022. The FSPO recognises that the customer experience of our own service users is a continuation of a consumer's journey in seeking to resolve his or her financial service complaint or pension complaint, and that the provision of good customer service is not something for which we can hold only financial service providers and pension providers accountable. This office continues to work to place consumers and their providers at the heart of our processes and to contribute to making their complaint journey a fair, efficient and effective one, regardless of the eventual outcome.

Another strategic objective relates to connecting and engaging. In addition to sharing our insights with the regulatory authorities, providers and their representative bodies, the FSPO recognises the value of our information for consumers. Our strategic plan establishes connecting and engaging as a strategic priority for the FSPO.

We undertook a market research exercise in 2021 to measure public awareness of the FSPO and awareness and understanding of our functions. We developed our first online videos which are accessible to all users through the use of clear, plain English content and voiceover, optional subtitles and the provision of a video transcript on our website for those who are hearing-impaired. The objective of these videos is to provide information to our service users about the services we offer and how they work. In delivering against this strategic priority, the FSPO has continued to use social media as a communications tool, in addition to more traditional communications channels. We have engaged targeted social media campaigns across several digital platforms, including our Facebook page, which was launched in 2022. This has proved to be an effective and economical method of raising awareness of our services across a wide demographic. The increasing use of online services in all areas of our lives may well have been accelerated by the pandemic but it appears set to continue. This is reflected in the proportion of complaints received by this office in 2022 through our website. In fact, 80% of complaints received in 2022 used our online complaint form, representing an increase from 58% in 2020.

While the ability to make complaints to this office online may be the preference for most, we have also ensured that we continue to make alternative methods available where complainants choose non-digital communication methods.

To assist our customers, we have produced four information leaflets, which have been disseminated through providers and stakeholder groups, as well as through our own services. We participated in a large-scale public event in August 2021 to increase our visibility and to connect and engage with potential customers of our service. Additionally, targeting of regional print and broadcast alongside national media has led to a significant increase in coverage, bringing greater awareness of our organisation, its decisions and outcomes. As a public body, we are committed to ensuring the accessibility of our services while harnessing the efficiency made possible by digitalisation.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to engage with it today. The Office of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman plays a vital role in Ireland’s consumer protection framework. We are guided by our values of fairness, integrity, independence, accessibility and effectiveness. These values are at the very heart of how we approach our daily work and interactions with our customers. We are committed to improving our services, focusing on engaging with, and influencing, our external environment. I thank and commend the staff of the FSPO for their continued commitment, hard work and dedication throughout 2021 and 2022. We will be very happy to answer any questions members may have.

The committee has a petition before it relating to the difficulties people have in getting insurance for thatched properties. Is that an issue the FSPO has come across? One of the problems is that providers are leaving the market. How can complaints about those providers that are leaving the market be resolved? Will the FSPO have any remit if providers have left the Irish market?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

Individuals can bring complaints to the FSPO in respect of the conduct of financial service providers. Complaints can be brought in respect of a wide range of issues. We certainly look at the complaints we receive.

Cases where service providers leave the market will depend on their status when the conduct in question took place. If the conduct being complained of occurred while the service provider was a regulated provider, a complaint can be brought to us and we can work with a complainant.

Some people were getting insurance but insurance companies have since decided there is a risk. Insurance for a thatched cottage is available in Northern Ireland for €749 but the equivalent insurance in the Republic is priced at 1% of the value of the property. That could be anything from €3,000 upwards. That is the problem we have. The fear communicated to the committee was that if that situation continues, people will not be able to get insurance for thatched cottages and we will lose something very Irish, pictures of which might be seen on a postcard. We will not see any more thatched cottages and people will start to replace the roofs. We hope to come to some sort of settlement with insurance companies or put pressure on them to continue what they were offering.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

We may have had written communication on this topic in the past 18 months. My recollection of that communication was that we sought to explain to the committee that the FSPO, as a complaints resolution body, does not have a role in giving direction to any particular financial service provider as to what products it should make available to the public. Thatched cottage insurance is a sort of specialised insurance and no doubt it is offered by specialist insurers. However, this office does not have a role in directing a member of the public. It is possible that Insurance Ireland may have a list. It will not be in a position to prefer one insurer to another but it may have a list of potential players in the market that might be in a position to quote for that business.

I thank the witnesses for giving up their time to come before the committee. Theirs is a young office that was only established in 2018 and they have been busy. Mr. Sloyan mentioned in his opening statement that the FSPO can direct compensation of up to €500,000. I do not think people are aware of that. I note the FSPO has strong powers, as it should. I am especially interested in insurance because there seems to be a free run in respect of public liability insurance. A delegation of Irish motorbike racers was in the audiovisual room a couple of weeks ago. They are struggling to get insurance quotes. It seems to be very unfair. Insurance companies seem to pick and choose. The difference between the rates down South and up North is bonkers. Insurance for a community circus in Northern Ireland was €6,079. In the Republic of Ireland, it was €39,100 for what I assume was the same insurance.

I was interested by what was said about insurance in respect of Covid-19 in 2022 and how successful the FSPO was in that regard. Mr. Sloyan also spoke about cases not going all the way to the FSPO if mediation can be used to resolve issues quickly. How are the banking organisations reacting to the FSPO? I suspect the FSPO will get a lot busier. Mr. Sloyan said that of the complaints the FSPO received at a very early stage during the registration and assessment process, 82% were resolved in 2022. That is a significant achievement because there must be resistance there from financial institutions or insurance companies. How is the FSPO finding that engagement? The office came out of the traps fast and has very strong powers. Perhaps those institutions do not want bad publicity so tend to resolve matters.

A bugbear of mine that I am hearing about in my office, as I am sure others are, is the issue of vulture funds. Whether they had permission or not, banks have sold people's mortgages. The vulture funds will not engage. Let us consider a hypothetical scenario in which somebody has two properties and one falls into arrears through no fault of their own. The vulture fund comes in and offer €5,000 but states it will take the two homes because the person in question has failed to repay a loan secured on the first home. How can the FSPO go after the likes of those funds? That is aggressive, nasty and low engagement with the owners of properties. The solution the vulture funds are coming up with is to offer €5,000, tell people to like it or lump it and take the properties, one way or the other. Can the FSPO go after vulture funds?

Ms MaryRose McGovern

May I jump in on that question?

Please do. I know there was a lot in what I asked.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

Perhaps I will start at the end and if I forget anything as I work my way backwards, the Deputy can remind me. It is important to recognise that we do not go after any particular financial service provider.

I apologise. Those were my words.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

I just want to ensure that is clear for anybody who is listening. Complainants who make complaints to our office and the respondent financial service providers are all customers of our office. We live the values of impartiality as we go about our business every day. A member of the public can make a complaint to the office about the manner in which they have been treated by a regulated financial services provider. The Deputy used the term "vulture funds" but I think they are known as "special purpose vehicles" in the world of the financial landscape. Some of those special purpose vehicles have been deemed regulated in recent years and where they are not regulated, they have credit servicing firms that are managing the day-to-day accounts on their behalf. If there is any conduct giving rise to a complaint, that is exactly the sort of complaint we would be happy to investigate. However, I want to ensure that everybody understands our impartiality as we go about that line of work.

I absolutely do. That is excellent.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

The 82% of cases that were resolved bears out the facts that we have a very high level of engagement from financial service providers that are seeking to resolve their complaints with their customers. In its current iteration, this is a young office.

We now exist as a merged entity from the office of the Pensions Ombudsman and the Financial Services Ombudsman's Bureau. Mediation was introduced as the default process in 2016. This was very much a leap of faith. It was a transformation of the office, but it was very much supported by the industry. Some of the significantly-sized financial service providers have gone as far as training their own staff in mediation. They are, as it were, able to step away from the rights and wrongs of what has gone amiss and direct their attention to finding a solution. That is what we want to do. Some 46% of complaints were resolved when we were registering them. The ombudsman talked about that in his opening statement, in that perhaps they could have been resolved earlier. They are coming to us. As soon as we put the customer in touch with their financial service provider, there is an opportunity there, which is being availed of, to resolve those complaints so they do not have to go any further.

However, when we take account of those resolutions at the front door, as it were, and the resolutions achieved in the mediation space, in 2022, that accounted for 82% of the complaints we resolved. We are really very pleased with the very positive engagement we have had from financial service providers

It is a huge success rate. For many of the committees here, there is never good news. There are always problems, issues or things that cannot be resolved. With a success rate like this, it is very important, even in these committees, that the good news story gets out because people are probably not aware of it. I was very surprised when I read some of the report. I thought that 82% was a massive success rate. Many of us perhaps perceive that these other institutions we talk about would fight and would not be as proactive or as progressive. As Ms McGovern said, mediation and trying to solve things, taking a common-sense approach, can work. I did not think that would be the case because I thought this would be met with more resistance.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

It is always voluntary.

I know, but it is still encouraging to hear that.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

We try to remind financial services providers of the fact these are their customers. If one is in a room with salespeople, they will be able to say how much it costs to acquire a new customer. We remind the providers of their existing customers and we try to create a space where the provider and the customer can design a solution to the problem.

That is very good. There were 4,781 complaints in 2022 and 4,647 of those were closed, with impactful outcomes for customers, including financial outcomes totalling more than €5 million for individual complaints were delivered. It is a good news story.

I will definitely touch base with the office because we have a lot of complaints about vulture funds or alternative arrangements for taking money from people or trying to extract it through pressure. I will definitely come back to it because I was not aware that there may be an avenue here to assist people. The office is about helping and I offer my thanks for the service. I am blown away because we do not get too many good news stories here. I realise that very good, determined staff, who are not afraid to think outside the box, are necessary. It also requires someone to drive it, to challenge people. As Ms McGovern said, do it the nice way first and give people the option to engage. If that does not work, the office knows that the backup exists through legislation. It has the power to act swiftly and with a lot of weight.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

I thank the Deputy for mentioning our staff because we have a very committed team who very much live the values of the organisation on a daily basis

This is vital, because in Irish society, or in any society for that matter, people are very slow to change. I always say that the key to anything is getting the right information out into the public domain. I suspect that the witnesses might be a lot busier after this meeting. Unfortunately, that comes with success.

I will certainly be working with the office more because I did not realise it had such a broad remit. We have a lot of people stuck in caravan parks and the insurance industry just seems to be picking off their own levels every so often. Something to do with regulation and a fair playing field is necessary there. Ireland is a small island, but the difference between this side of it and the Six Counties is frightening. How do we find balance in that? Can the office work with the European Union? If the office refers cases to the Central Bank, where it seems to have a good success rate, which is a good sign, is there a mechanism by which issues can be raised without going to the High Court? We are all supposed to be part of Europe but everything seems to be different. Why are we the outlier when it comes to people paying much higher insurance premiums than people in Holland or Germany, for example? Can the office raise that issue? What can we do to work with the office to benefit everybody and bring in more regulation and a fairer playing field?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

I very much appreciate the nature of the Deputy's comments and questions, in particular, talking about how the engagement with this committee could increase the public awareness of the office. A core part of our strategy is to connect and engage with the public and to share and influence with policymakers and wider regulators. The Deputy referred to our international impact and our engagement there. The deputy ombudsman might speak a little about our engagement with our other ombudsman services.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

We are a member of the European Union's FIN-NET, which is the network of alternative dispute resolution, ADR, bodies, for financial service complaints across the member states. We have been conscious over the last couple of years of the increased level of cross-border service provision. This is what the European Union is about. It is about the free movement of people and goods and services. Paradoxically, this cross-border passporting to provide services in other jurisdictions creates challenges for consumers across the EU, including in Ireland. For example, if an entity that is regulated by a competent authority - another central bank in another member state - passports into Ireland and offers banking services here, we may have to refer the complaint to a different ADR body in the relevant member state, if we look at the contract and it states it is governed by the laws of the different member state. We cannot hold ourselves up as being capable of resolving complaints pursuant to Latvian, French or Spanish law, for example. In that case, we put them in touch with the appropriate FIN-NET body.

We have been working with the Department of Finance on this for the last while. A consultation period was opened by the European Union towards the end of 2022. This consultation process is looking at how the ADR directive is working and how the online dispute resolution, ODR, directive is working as well. We took the opportunity to raise this issue in our formal submission on the ADR piece. We are supported in that by the Department of Finance, which also made a submission to the European Union so that those comments can feed into how the future of ADR is going to look.

In addition, I do some work on the steering committee for FIN-NET. We have sent out a survey to all the ADR bodies across the European Union with a view to gathering some data on whether the picture we see, which is an increasing number of complaints every year being referred to a different ADR body, is similar in the other member states. If this is an issue created by cross-border services provision, Ireland cannot be the only place where it is becoming an issue for consumers as the landscape evolves and there are more and more fintech service providers, as they are referred to, passporting into other European states. That is likely to give rise to a larger number of complaints which we will have to refer onwards.

That may not be a difficulty, but it is possibly not the expectation of consumers in Ireland that if they make a complaint to the FSPO, they may be sent to another body. There was an interesting article in the Financial Times about a month ago that one of my colleagues in the office referred me to, which shone a light, as it were, on the number of fintech complaints being received by our colleagues in the Financial Ombudsman Service, FOS, in the UK. I appreciate that the UK is not a member of the EU, but the FOS is an affiliate member of the FIN-NET network of alternative dispute resolution, ADR, bodies. Some of the data that were included in that Financial Times article is probably worth having a look at, because it shows that fintech-type complaints are on the increase, and not only that, but the experience of the FOS in the UK is that fintech-type complaints are potentially more likely to be upheld complaints. There have definitely been some issues emerging with people finding themselves locked out of their accounts and, more frustratingly, not being able to speak to a human being with a view to getting to the bottom of it. We are in a constantly evolving landscape and it is important that consumers in Ireland and in the European Union have an appropriate body to bring their complaint to, in order that they can resolve their complaint in a way that is relatively quick, and can get to the bottom of the issues.

That is excellent. As I have said, that information itself is extremely beneficial. I was not aware of it but now I am. Moreover, people listening in will be aware of it. It is about engaging with the FSPO. As somebody once said to me, if you do not learn something new every day, forget about it. I welcome that. Unfortunately, when the FSPO starts hearing from me, it will be busier. I thank the witnesses for coming in.

Mr. Liam Sloyan

Just one other point that we should touch on. We have talked a lot about insurance in our discussions to date. One of the positive things that will have come through in the 2022 overview that we published is the reduction in complaints to our office relating to insurance. There has been a significant reduction there that is worth noting.

Coming back to the issue of insurance, what power, if any, does the FSPO with regard to the overall pricing? In the ombudsman's opinion, what actually needs to be done about the huge differences in premiums? I ask him to comment on that.

Mr. Liam Sloyan

It is important to consider this in the context of our role, which is to help resolve complaints that individual consumers might have with respect to the conduct of a financial service provider. When it is looked at in that context, and the consumer comes to us and they argue that there was something in the behaviour of the provider that was in some way unreasonable, unlawful, improper or improperly discriminatory, we can look at that. However, when we move into the context of matters that are within the commercial discretion of a provider, that is not something that we can act on. We can only find, in relation to the conduct of a provider, where it does meet one of those categories in terms of the lawfulness of it, the reasonableness of it and the justness of it - those types of things.

One of the things that Deputy Buckley raised, and the witnesses said themselves, is there is a significant number of external drafters in the FSPO, and that an emergency procurement process was needed. What was the reason for the staff numbers going down and how many more are needed to bring the organisation to a full complement of staff to take control of all the claims?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

We are very conscious of the need to continuously evolve and to look at our resource requirements in terms of human resources, systems resources and, indeed, to look at our processes as well. That is core to our strategy. It is something that we will continuously do. We have to continuously do it because of the changing landscape that the deputy ombudsman referred to. We will do that again this year. We will look at all of our processes, resources and systems, and determine what further things we may need to do in any of these areas.

What would be the most common type of complaint that the FSPO would deal with, on a yearly basis? Is there a trend in complaints?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

In 2022, 28% of our complaints related to customer service. Things like response times and the ability to contact the provider would all be included within that. We did mention that some of these complaints fell to be resolved quite quickly once they came to our office. That is one thing that I noted in the overview of complaints. There is an opportunity there for providers to look at these types of complaints and ask if the customers really needed to come to us. The case of "Angela" was highlighted in the overview. She paid off her mortgage and wished to be discharged from it so that she could get full title to her house. According to Angela, she tried to contact the financial service provider for a year, and was unable to do so. She then came to our office, and once our office came into the picture, the matter was resolved quickly. Those types of things are things that the providers can look at, to determine if they are issues that really require an ombudsman to get involved, or if they can look at their own systems to ensure that they can be addressed more quickly.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

As the ombudsman mentioned there, for 28% of complaints that we received in 2022 there was an element of customer service. That was really disappointing, because the overall statistic for 2021 was 23%, so that was an increase. However, it is worth bearing in mind that our results are always a little bit behind when the event happened. I am very mindful of the work the Central Bank of Ireland has been doing. It conducted a review of customer support telephone lines. In February 2022, when it published the results, they were really very disappointing. There were wait times of up to two hours for customers trying to get through on the phone, and very significant attrition rates, where people were just simply unwilling to wait any longer. The Central Bank published an update on that work earlier this year, however, and the net result of that was that better results were being shown. That shows that when you put the resources into servicing the needs of your customers, it can give rise to good outcomes. With my fingers crossed, I am hopeful that perhaps the percentage of complaints with a customer service element to them that we will see will drop. The resourcing piece to ensure that customers of financial service providers are adequately supported is particularly important with two significantly-sized players leaving the market in Ireland and a number of those customers transferring to existing players in the market, as it were. What we would like to see is that those new customers who have transferred, like the existing customers, will continue to be supported at an adequate level.

In relation to travel insurance, the cases of "Jennifer", "Jack" and "Matthew" were mentioned. Can the witnesses clarify how the insurance companies determine what constitutes pre-existing conditions, and the waiting period involved?

Ms MaryRose McGovern

I am delighted the Chair has raised our digest of decisions of travel insurance. It is a permanent resource on the website, and anybody who is intending to head off on a holiday or a long weekend, or to visit a loved one abroad, can go online to our website, fspo.ie, and have a look at the booklet. We have chosen decisions that highlight the sort of themes that give rise to complaints. One thing to bear in mind, if you are heading away, is that you should not leave it until you are locking the front door and heading off to the airport. The time to review your travel insurance is before you are anywhere close to departing. If you take 15 minutes to read through the terms and conditions of the policy, it will give you a much better understanding as to what you are covered for. There are some travel insurers that do not cover any pre-existing condition, so it does not matter whether you actually disclose it. You are not going to be covered; that is not the product that is on offer. For many other travel insurers, pre-existing conditions will be covered as long as you give the insurer an opportunity to have a look at the details of that pre-existing condition in order that it fully understands it and can quote for it.

The Cathaoirleach mentioned a couple of case studies there. Consider the case of "Maeve" and "John", for example, who were due to head off on a holiday. Maeve had had an X-ray but she had not disclosed this to the insurer when she purchased the travel insurance policy. Unfortunately, her issue led to the cancellation of the trip and then she sought to make a claim. Maeve did not know that she had osteoarthritis but she knew that she had had an X-ray. It is important for consumers to take some time over this. We can be very optimistic about our own health. We can feel that we are doing very well but if a person has had an X-ray or blood tests, they are indicative that there is something going on. It does not need to have a name or a diagnosis. Those are the symptoms of something, and having the symptoms of something is indicative of a pre-existing condition.

Within what kind of period before one travels must the X-ray be declared?

Ms MaryRose McGovern

That would depend on the policy terms. Another resource in our digest is the digest of health insurance decisions, and likewise that concept of a pre-existing condition is very important. One of our case studies for health insurance was "Clara" who incepted a health insurance policy for the first time. The following day she headed off to the doctor because she had pain in her back. Sadly, for Clara, which is not her real name, it transpired that she had a tumour in her back. She did not know that she had a tumour in her back but because she had the symptoms before she incepted the policy for health insurance, she was not covered for that pre-existing condition. This is an industry standard for health insurance of five years. If a person upgrades his or her health insurance there is an industry standard waiting period of two years. The person will be covered but he or she will be covered on the basis of what the policy level was before he or she paid for that upgrade.

There is a case I am dealing with at the minute. It is a couple who travelled in August and had only just landed when the woman's brother died, so they came home. They then went to their insurance company and everything seemed to be going rosy. Covid was given as an excuse as to why the insurance company was not getting back to them. They rang again in December to be told there was a big delay. They rang again the following March but then the insurance company looked for the actual death notice from the family, which was six months down the road. The family had sent the death notice at the time, along with all of the details of the funeral, but now the insurance company is refusing to pay out. Should this couple contact the ombudsman's office?

Ms MaryRose McGovern

That is exactly the sort of complaint that we would investigate. We would, however, need to look at the particular policy and ultimately, if it is not resolved in mediation, at whether the conduct of the financial service provider was reasonable in the circumstances, and whether it was in accordance with-----

There was never any mention to the couple that they needed the death certificate when they contacted the insurance company. It was only six months down the road that it was mentioned. At this stage, for obvious reasons, the couple does not want to have to go to the children of the chap who died looking for the death certificate belonging to their father.

Mr. Liam Sloyan

In that type of instance the customer needs first of all to complain to the financial service provider and go through their process. If the couple remains dissatisfied, then they can come to us with their complaint and we would investigate it.

Reference was made to fraud and investment fraud. What kind of investment fraud are the ombudsman's offices coming across?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

It is important to note in this instance that fraud is a criminal matter, so it would be a matter for An Garda Síochána and for the courts. We look at the conduct of the financial service providers. We do get some complaints whereby a customer is of the view that he or she was defrauded. Again, that would be a matter for An Garda Síochána. The person may have a view that there was something about conduct of the financial service provider, somewhat related to his or her experience, and that he or she has a complaint. It is that element such people are bringing as a complaint to us.

If it was something like that, and given that fraud is a criminal offence, can the ombudsman's office refer that to An Garda Síochána? What is the process there? I ask this in order that people outside would know.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

Once we highlight to somebody wanting to make a complaint that this is really a matter for An Garda Síochána or for the courts then we would expect them to be able to do that themselves.

That is excellent.

Mr. Liam Sloyan

As an example, in the overview of a case where somebody notified their bank that they were enticed to invest in some product, the complainant notified the bank when they made the initial investment that the person they were dealing with took over control of their computer during the process. They then made a complaint and a number of subsequent investments took place and no money was returned. The person made a complaint to our office. In that instance there was a mediated settlement between the bank and the customer in relation to financial services.

That is very interesting. It was the security aspect.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

There may be fraud in the background, but ultimately the role of the FSPO is to investigate the conduct of the financial service provider. We are expecting there to see a level of responsiveness from the financial service provider that something has gone wrong. There may be nothing to be done as the money may be long gone but there is a provision under the payments services directive if a person's money has been transferred and if it has been an unauthorised transaction to reach in and try to get it back. That is an effort that the financial service provider can undertake only on a best efforts basis. We would expect that if a person comes to his or her bank fraught and believing he or she has been defrauded, the bank would act expeditiously. There may be nothing to be done but we would expect a level of service to a customer in those circumstances.

Mr. Liam Sloyan

A key part is that we will investigate the conduct of the provider.

It is about accountability, responsibility and proper rules and regulation, proper security procedures and so on. If they are failing on that then there is an issue. That is excellent.

I have final question as Deputy Devlin is still not there. As the witnesses look into the future, do they see any potential developments coming down the line that they need to prepare for? If the offices are fully staffed and given the resources, would they be happy that they could face any potential developments? Do they see anything major outside of what they are already dealing with currently?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

There are a few, as it is a changing environment. The deputy ombudsman has already referred to the cross-border element. The number of complaints we are receiving from people with addresses outside of Ireland has grown significantly over the past two years. I believe they account now for 20% of the cases we received in 2022.

Ms MaryRose McGovern

The other element to watch is the European Union regulation on markets in crypto-assets, MiCA. Up to now, crypto assets have not been regulated. Only last month, the European Union signed off on the new regulations under MiCA. This provides for a transitional period. This will not become effective until July 2024. The Central Bank has been very clear in its messages to consumers that crypto assets are a highly volatile asset in which to invest. The landscape is definitely more complex than it used to be. There are regulated financial service providers that offer a suite of products that include regulated products and unregulated products. Our expectation is that when a customer goes to a regulated financial service provider, and if that provider decides to take the customer by the hand and bring him or her over the threshold from a regulated space into an unregulated space, that this would be very clearly documented and the risks would be recorded in order that a consumer can make an informed decision as to whether he or she wants to go down that route. It is definitely a complex environment and there are mixed messages in that space, in the sense that the Central Bank is very clear that crypto assets are very high risk. In the context of MiCA, crypto exchange platforms are now becoming regulated. I believe there may be four that are regulated by the Central Bank right now.

That provides a facility for people to take their money and move it into crypto assets which, I cannot say often enough, are highly volatile. There are risks that come with that. The future will be one where we see a lot more of that. Again, returning to our role in that, we investigate complaints against regulated financial service providers. Often, we see that someone who has lost money may have asked their bank to transfer or authorised the transfer of funds to a regulated crypto exchange and may have taken the assets from the crypto exchange and put it in another wallet somewhere else down the line again. That is probably a third entity. If something goes wrong at that point, any complaint against a bank or regulated crypto exchange platform is unlikely to be where the problem has arisen. It is an emerging world. It is full of risk and it is full of lots of crypto.

Do Mr. Sloyan or Ms McGovern wish to make any closing remarks?

Mr. Liam Sloyan

We thank the committee for hearing us. It is very useful for us to have the opportunity to engage with it and to bring our services to wider attention. We want to acknowledge again the tremendous work of the staff in the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman for all the good work they are doing for all our customers.

We have found it very beneficial to have the chance to speak with them. I have no doubt that, as Deputy Buckley said, he will definitely be in touch with them and I imagine that the rest of the committee will also look to re-engage with the office again. I thank both of our guests.

Sitting suspended at 2.42 p.m. and resumed at 2.45 p.m.
Top
Share