Search results

The paper focuses on the tensions between the subjective discretionary decision making of an ombudsman and the objective non‐discretionary decision making favoured by judges, especially on appeal or judicial review from an ombudsman. Is ‘justice according to law’, an oxy‐moron? Examples of decisions where the law was deliberately not applied because it was not considered ‘fair and reasonable in all the circumstances’ are taken from the writer's time as Insurance (and later Pensions) Ombudsman. Will the Financial Services Ombudsman Scheme revive a newer equity or will consistency be regarded as something better than justice in the individual case?

This paper examines what the financial services industry expects from the Insurance Ombudsman Bureau. It measures the IOB's success in meeting these expectations against the yardsticks of public confidence and cost‐effectiveness. In the light of Lord Ackner's recently accepted recommendation that the IOB be replaced by a new Ombudsman scheme, this paper concludes that the IOB has failed' the industry by asserting the functions for which it was originally created.

Britain's nine ombudsmen provide an informal and inexpensive mechanism for resolving disputes and grievances that arise between individual members of the public and organisations participating in the ombudsmen's schemes. They have been criticised, however, for being at times slow, limited, and ineffective. An ombudsman is defined as an adjudicator who is independent of the organisations he supervises and who is entitled to award compensation to complainants. In this paper, the scope of each scheme, and its strengths and weaknesses, are individually surveyed. Awareness and use of the ombudsmen among members of the public is very low, but whether they would be able to cope with an increased demand for their services without structural change is doubted.