Q&As

Does the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) have jurisdiction to deal with a complaint relating to an unfair relationship under sections 140A–140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974? Is there no reason why the FOS should not make an order equivalent to an order made by the court under section 140B?

read titleRead full title
Published on LexisPSL on 05/04/2022

The following Financial Services Q&A provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Does the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) have jurisdiction to deal with a complaint relating to an unfair relationship under sections 140A–140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974? Is there no reason why the FOS should not make an order equivalent to an order made by the court under section 140B?

Does the service'>Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) have jurisdiction to deal with a complaint relating to an unfair relationship under sections 140A–140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974? Is there no reason why the FOS should not make an order equivalent to an order made by the court under section 140B?

See, in general, Practice Notes: Unfair relationships under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Financial Ombudsman Service—essentials, Financial Ombudsman Service—remedies, Financial Ombudsman Service—compulsory jurisdiction and The complaint-handling process of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

In considering whether the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has jurisdiction to deal with a complaint relating to an unfair relationship under sections 140A–140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974) the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) in relation to credit-related complaints is provided for in the FCA Handbook at DISP 2.1.1G, DISP 2.1.2G, DISP 2.3.1R, and DISP 2.3.2–AG.

The FOS webpage on consumer credit explains the FOS’ general approach to complaints about consumer credit, including complaints relating to CCA 1974. See Consumer

Related documents:

Popular documents