Although this is not mentioned anywhere in their Terms of Reference, on their website nor in any of their brochures publicising the service, the FOS General Insurance division demand total secrecy if they are to consider a complaint from a consumer; they require confidentiality to protect the identity of the insurer.
This is cause for serious alarm considering that the FOS was established solely to protect the interests of the consumer. This requirement is only revealed when a consumer actually approaches FOS, only then are they told of the requirement of an undertaking saying:
“I shall not publish or disclose to any third party the Detrmination of the Service in a form that discloses the identity of the member without its prior written consent”
The word ‘member’ refers to an insurance company and that word itself questions the impartiality of FOS. They should be adjudicating on the insurance industry from a totally independant standpoint and that they use the word ‘member’ indicates an unhealthy relationship that is pro-insurance industry but kept under wraps behind a veil of secrecy and a refusal to answer queries. Two thousand years ago the Romans had a phrase for this – ‘Quis custodiet ipsos custodes’ – who will police the police?
The secrecy demand is carefully re-enforced again by FOS after a Determination is produced when the consumer is told:
“You are reminded of your agreement with us not to publish or disclose the Determination to any third party in a form that discloses the indentity of ABC insurance without its prior written consent”
The reason for this is quite clear – the insurance companies – the very industry who’s activities FOS was established to control are in fact controlling the FOS – otherwise why the demand for secrecy? They will not allow FOS to intervene without this protection and this is the reason why this requirement does not appear officially, anywhere, until an individual consumer requests help. The tail is wagging the dog. For comparison purposes we have asked the Financial Ombudsman Service in the UK whether they impose a similar secrecy requirement and we have been told that consumers there are quite free to reveal anything – so why not here?
The FOS appear to be acting outside their Terms of Reference and as such any undertaking is meaningless and can be ignored. In the coming weeks we shall be examining a whole range of FOS Determinations and will be publishing full details and names of all parties involved. Times are changing, the public are entitled to expect full transparency and to be able to scrutinise and consider each matter in an open fashion.