Latest news with #FinancialOmbudsmanService
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Reeves unveils City reforms aimed at cutting red tape and fuelling UK growth
Rachel Reeves has unveiled a package of City reforms meant to cut 'unnecessary' red tape and encourage more financial risk-taking by companies and consumers in the hopes of spurring economic growth. In a financial services strategy dubbed the Leeds Reforms, the chancellor outlined initiatives designed to boost the financial services sector, including plans to cut 'unnecessary costs' related to accountability rules for senior bankers, and launch an advertising campaign to get consumers investing cash savings in stocks. The UK government will review ringfencing rules – introduced after the 2008 financial crisis – that are meant to protect consumer cash from a bank's riskier business activities in the coming months. The independence of the Financial Ombudsman Service, which settles complaints between consumers and businesses, will be watered down. The rate of interest – and total compensation – that banks and other City firms have to pay to wronged consumers will be reduced. The reforms were announced ahead of Reeves's Mansion House speech, where she will address the most senior bosses from across the financial services sector during a dinner at the Guildhall in London on Tuesday night. The chancellor is under pressure after official figures last week showed the economy shrank by 0.1% in May, and she is widely expected to have to raise taxes again in the autumn budget. Business groups have blamed Reeves's £25bn increase in employer national insurance contributions – which came into force in April – for weighing on growth, while Donald Trump's trade war has sapped confidence. Reeves said in a statement on Tuesday morning: 'We fixed the public finances and stabilised the economy. Now we need to double down on our global strengths to put the UK ahead in the global race for financial businesses, creating good, skilled jobs in every part of the country and helping savers' money go further through our plan for change.' The Leeds Reforms were revealed during a summit with City bosses in West Yorkshire, including the Lloyds Banking Group chief executive, Charlie Nunn. The bosses of City regulators, who have been under pressure to cut regulatory burdens on UK firms, were also in attendance, including the Financial Conduct Authority's chief executive, Nikhil Rathi, and the head of the Bank of England's Prudential Regulation Authority, Sam Woods. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion The Treasury said the package of reforms would ultimately 'tear down the barriers' to investment while 'reintroducing informed risk-taking into the system, cutting unnecessary red tape, driving more finance into public markets and actively helping international companies to set up in the UK'. Together, the reforms are intended to make the UK the 'number one' hub for financial services firms by 2035, with the Labour government saying it will help attract inward investment.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Climate
- Telegraph
Insurer denied payout after claiming roof blown off by storm was ‘wear and tear'
An insurer refused a couple's storm damage payout after saying their roof blew off due to 'wear and tear'. The homeowners – known only as Mr and Mrs M – made a claim on their building insurance after their flat roof was torn off 'in one piece', during powerful winds in December 2023. But Royal & Sun Alliance (RSA) rejected the claim, saying the damage was 'gradual' and 'due to wear and tear', not storm conditions. Mr and Mrs M complained to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), which investigated and found in their favour. The online FOS ruling said: 'RSA relied on the aerial photo of the roof, photos of the debris and Mr and Mrs M saying that the roof had never been repaired to arrive at its decision.' Distress caused However, the FOS upheld the complaint due to evidence from a surveyor and a roofer that stated the roof had been in 'fair' condition before the storm and that it had been ripped off 'by an extraordinarily powerful wind'. The FOS ordered RSA to pay the claim plus 8pc interest. It also instructed the firm to fork out £1,000 for the distress caused. Mr and Mrs M had been forced to live 'without a permanent roof' for several months while suffering from serious health conditions. A spokesman for RSA Insurance said: 'Assessing any damage following a storm is never simple or clear-cut. In this particular case, our assessment found some, but not all, of the damage to the roof was due to gradual deterioration over a long period of time and a natural breakdown of materials. This was a decision the Ombudsman initially agreed with. 'The Ombudsman independently reviewed both parties' submissions and provided their own assessment. After further consideration, it was concluded that the claim should be paid in full. We respect the decision, and we are currently working with the customer to finalise a resolution.' A growing problem A growing number of homeowners are claiming on their insurance as UK storms become more severe and more frequent due to climate change. Storm Éowyn, which hit the UK in January 2025, was the strongest wind storm in over a decade, according to the Met Office. Meanwhile, the year 2023-24 brought the most named storms since records began in 2015-16. Last year, insurers paid out a record-breaking £585m for weather-related damage to properties and possessions, according to data from the Association of British Insurers (ABI). But data suggests that rows over payouts are increasingly common.
Leader Live
a day ago
- Business
- Leader Live
Financial ombudsman rebuked by MPs over handling of ex-chief's ‘dismissal'
In a report published on Monday, the Commons Treasury Committee criticised Baroness Manzoor for declining to answer its questions about the ousting of Abby Thomas from her role in February. The peer and chairwoman had been asked by MPs to explain why Ms Thomas had stepped down from her role as chief executive of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and whether any severance package was agreed. She declined to do so, saying only that the move had been a 'mutual agreement' and citing her 'duties to safeguard the wellbeing of our employees' and 'protect the interests' of the ombudsman service. In a letter to the committee on February 19, Baroness Manzoor claimed that 'as a member of the House of Lords, I cannot be required either to attend before the committee, or or to answer its questions,' the report says. In Monday's report, MPs said that 'although this argument was strictly true' because Commons committees have no power to compel the Lords, 'it was unnecessary and disrespectful'. Following Baroness Manzoor's letter, the committee ordered the FOS to submit details of any severance deal or financial package and any confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement negotiated between the service and Ms Thomas. Although the FOS complied with the order, the committee has not published the details, claiming its decision not to do so reflects 'our awareness of the need to balance transparency against fairness to individuals.' In its report, the committee sums up the reason for Ms Thomas' dismissal as a 'collapse in confidence' driven by 'fundamental disagreements' over strategy and operations between the board and the former chief executive. 'This collapse in confidence covered a broad range of issues and was not driven by a single event or topic,' it says. 'The mutual collapse in confidence led the FOS Board to dismiss Abby Thomas.' Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said the service's failure to block Commons scrutiny should send a 'clear message' to others seeking to frustrate the process. 'I'm afraid that the handling of this situation by the senior leadership of the Financial Ombudsman Service has been deeply disappointing,' she said. 'The attempt to frustrate a House of Commons Committee from scrutinising the actions of a publicly accountable organisation ultimately proved unsuccessful. 'I hope this sends a clear message to any organisation considering similar action in future that Members of the House of Commons will have answers to the questions they ask on behalf of the British public, whether senior officials attempt to block them or not.' Baroness Manzoor said: 'I highly value the Treasury Select Committee and the important role it plays in holding the financial sector to account. 'I am committed to providing open and transparent evidence to the committee, but there are rare instances when that can be difficult – particularly when it relates to employment matters. 'I have always treated the committee with the utmost seriousness and respect, and I know the Financial Ombudsman Service will continue to work closely with them in the future.'
South Wales Guardian
2 days ago
- Business
- South Wales Guardian
Financial ombudsman rebuked by MPs over handling of ex-chief's ‘dismissal'
In a report published on Monday, the Commons Treasury Committee criticised Baroness Manzoor for declining to answer its questions about the ousting of Abby Thomas from her role in February. The peer and chairwoman had been asked by MPs to explain why Ms Thomas had stepped down from her role as chief executive of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and whether any severance package was agreed. She declined to do so, saying only that the move had been a 'mutual agreement' and citing her 'duties to safeguard the wellbeing of our employees' and 'protect the interests' of the ombudsman service. In a letter to the committee on February 19, Baroness Manzoor claimed that 'as a member of the House of Lords, I cannot be required either to attend before the committee, or or to answer its questions,' the report says. In Monday's report, MPs said that 'although this argument was strictly true' because Commons committees have no power to compel the Lords, 'it was unnecessary and disrespectful'. Following Baroness Manzoor's letter, the committee ordered the FOS to submit details of any severance deal or financial package and any confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement negotiated between the service and Ms Thomas. Although the FOS complied with the order, the committee has not published the details, claiming its decision not to do so reflects 'our awareness of the need to balance transparency against fairness to individuals.' In its report, the committee sums up the reason for Ms Thomas' dismissal as a 'collapse in confidence' driven by 'fundamental disagreements' over strategy and operations between the board and the former chief executive. 'This collapse in confidence covered a broad range of issues and was not driven by a single event or topic,' it says. 'The mutual collapse in confidence led the FOS Board to dismiss Abby Thomas.' Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said the service's failure to block Commons scrutiny should send a 'clear message' to others seeking to frustrate the process. 'I'm afraid that the handling of this situation by the senior leadership of the Financial Ombudsman Service has been deeply disappointing,' she said. 'The attempt to frustrate a House of Commons Committee from scrutinising the actions of a publicly accountable organisation ultimately proved unsuccessful. 'I hope this sends a clear message to any organisation considering similar action in future that Members of the House of Commons will have answers to the questions they ask on behalf of the British public, whether senior officials attempt to block them or not.' Baroness Manzoor said: 'I highly value the Treasury Select Committee and the important role it plays in holding the financial sector to account. 'I am committed to providing open and transparent evidence to the committee, but there are rare instances when that can be difficult – particularly when it relates to employment matters. 'I have always treated the committee with the utmost seriousness and respect, and I know the Financial Ombudsman Service will continue to work closely with them in the future.'
Glasgow Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Glasgow Times
Financial ombudsman rebuked by MPs over handling of ex-chief's ‘dismissal'
In a report published on Monday, the Commons Treasury Committee criticised Baroness Manzoor for declining to answer its questions about the ousting of Abby Thomas from her role in February. The peer and chairwoman had been asked by MPs to explain why Ms Thomas had stepped down from her role as chief executive of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and whether any severance package was agreed. She declined to do so, saying only that the move had been a 'mutual agreement' and citing her 'duties to safeguard the wellbeing of our employees' and 'protect the interests' of the ombudsman service. In a letter to the committee on February 19, Baroness Manzoor claimed that 'as a member of the House of Lords, I cannot be required either to attend before the committee, or or to answer its questions,' the report says. In Monday's report, MPs said that 'although this argument was strictly true' because Commons committees have no power to compel the Lords, 'it was unnecessary and disrespectful'. Following Baroness Manzoor's letter, the committee ordered the FOS to submit details of any severance deal or financial package and any confidentiality or non-disclosure agreement negotiated between the service and Ms Thomas. Although the FOS complied with the order, the committee has not published the details, claiming its decision not to do so reflects 'our awareness of the need to balance transparency against fairness to individuals.' In its report, the committee sums up the reason for Ms Thomas' dismissal as a 'collapse in confidence' driven by 'fundamental disagreements' over strategy and operations between the board and the former chief executive. 'This collapse in confidence covered a broad range of issues and was not driven by a single event or topic,' it says. 'The mutual collapse in confidence led the FOS Board to dismiss Abby Thomas.' Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said the service's failure to block Commons scrutiny should send a 'clear message' to others seeking to frustrate the process. 'I'm afraid that the handling of this situation by the senior leadership of the Financial Ombudsman Service has been deeply disappointing,' she said. 'The attempt to frustrate a House of Commons Committee from scrutinising the actions of a publicly accountable organisation ultimately proved unsuccessful. 'I hope this sends a clear message to any organisation considering similar action in future that Members of the House of Commons will have answers to the questions they ask on behalf of the British public, whether senior officials attempt to block them or not.' Baroness Manzoor said: 'I highly value the Treasury Select Committee and the important role it plays in holding the financial sector to account. 'I am committed to providing open and transparent evidence to the committee, but there are rare instances when that can be difficult – particularly when it relates to employment matters. 'I have always treated the committee with the utmost seriousness and respect, and I know the Financial Ombudsman Service will continue to work closely with them in the future.'
