Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 3 July 2018
68. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the number of times the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman has used its discretion to examine cases outside the designated time limits since the passing of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017; the circumstances of each case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28693/18]
View answerFirstly, I must point out that the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman is independent in the performance of his statutory functions. I have no role in the day to day workings of his office.
However, I have been advised by the Ombudsman that where a question of time-limits arises, the Ombudsman gives active consideration to all aspects of Section 51 of the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017 which provides the following in relation to time-limits for the making of complaints to the Ombudsman:-
(1) A complaint in relation to conduct referred to in section 44(1)(a) that does not relate to a long-term financial service shall be made to the Ombudsman not later than 6 years from the date of the conduct giving rise to the complaint.
(2) A complaint in relation to—
(a) conduct referred to in section 44(1)(a) that, subject to the requirements specified in subsection (3), relates to a long-term financial service, or
(b) conduct referred to in section 44(1)(b), that is subject to the requirements specified in subsection (4),
shall be made to the Ombudsman within whichever of the following periods is the last to expire:
(i) 6 years from the date of the conduct giving rise to the complaint;
(ii) 3 years from the earlier of the date on which the person making the complaint became aware, or ought reasonably to have become aware, of the conduct giving rise to the complaint;
(iii) such longer period as the Ombudsman may allow where it appears to him or her that there are reasonable grounds for requiring a longer period and that it would be just and equitable, in all the circumstances, to so extend the period.
(3) The requirements referred to in subsection (2)(a) are that—
(a) the long-term financial service concerned has not expired or otherwise been terminated more than 6 years before the date of the complaint, and the conduct complained of occurred during or after 2002, or
(b) the Ombudsman has allowed a longer period under subsection (2)(iii).
(4) The requirements referred to in subsection (2)(b) are that—
(a) where the conduct occurred prior to the establishment day, that conduct occurred within the period between 13 April 1996 and the establishment day, or
(b) the Ombudsman has allowed a longer period under subsection (2)(iii).
(5) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2)—
(a) conduct that is of a continuing nature is taken to have occurred at the time when it stopped and conduct that consists of a series of acts or omissions is taken to have occurred when the last of those acts or omissions occurred, and
(b) conduct that consists of a single act or omission is taken to have occurred on the date of that act or omission.
(6) The time limits specified in this section shall, on and after the establishment day,
apply to the following:
(a) any complaint received by the Financial Services Ombudsman or the Pensions Ombudsman which had not been assessed as to its suitability for consideration by the Financial Services Ombudsman or the Pensions Ombudsman, as the case may be;
(b) any complaint received by the Financial Services Ombudsman or the Pensions Ombudsman before the establishment day that was refused as being outside the applicable time limits in the Act of 1942 or the Act of 1990 respectively and that has been resubmitted to the Ombudsman on or after the establishment day.
The Ombudsman has confirmed that since the commencement of the 2017 Act on 1 January 2018, he has, where appropriate, engaged with both parties, to confirm all relevant details of the complaint before making a final determination as to whether the designated time-limits have been met. I understand that the Ombudsman has not yet had cause to rely on Section 51(2)(iii) to extend the time-limits to allow for the examination of a complaint outside of the designated time-limits.
