( To return to the main website home page please click here.)

The role of the FOS Independent Assessor
Michael Barnes CBE until May 2010,  
currently Linda Costelloe Baker OBE

With a salary for £47,876 for two days a week, (equivalent to about £120,000 pa) plus benefits, the post is clearly regarded as an important one by FOS, but despite the rewards, the IA's duties and authority are minimal. The job is to consider complaints made about the standard of service provided by the FOS and provide reports on the findings. The IA is specifically not permitted to consider the merits of an Ombudsman or Adjudicator's decision.

The IA deals with very few cases. The IA's report for 2009/10 tells us that he considered less than 0.1% of FOS cases and of these he upheld only 67and made compensation awards in only 60 cases. These ranged from £50 to £1000 with one award of £1500

As well as making his awards the IA also prepares reports for the FOS Board, but since he has only considered service standards in 1 in every 1000 FOS decisions, it is difficult to see what use his reports will be in improving the overall conduct of FOS business. Indeed the IA confirms this in several earlier Annual Reports, saying "care should be taken in applying any conclusions drawn from my work to the ombudsman service's work as a whole". The IA is specifically prohibited from considering the merits of decisions, so his report is useless for assessing the quality of the FOS's main business. What use the FOS Board makes of these reports is uncertain. For instance he has drawn attention to problems where FOS does not calculate awards but allows the businesses to do it, however little seems to change, causing him to repeat the warnings for several years.

There is also doubt about the actual independence of the Independent Assessor. Mr Barnes was not appointed independently, but paid and appointed by the FOS Board and he was actually an FOS Board member until shortly before his appointment so 'Nolan' or similar standards did not apply. Similarly, the new IA, Ms Linda Costelloe Baker, was not appointed independently, but by the FOS Board. This time they were assisted by an "independent public interest observer". The role of this person is not known, but presumably as an 'observer' they took no part in the selection. The ordinary man in the street will have difficulty seeing such appointments as independent in the usual sense of the word, and it seems the FOS may be sensitive to this since the IA's office address, telephone, fax and email details are kept secret. To contact the IA it is necessary to write to a PO BOX, an extraordinary and ludicrous arrangement for a public official especially when the advertisment for the current IA stated that the post is based at the FOS HQ at South Quay where administrative support is available.

There is also evidence that Mr Barnes has discussed with the principal Ombudsman, FOS's likely response to his recommendations before he decided whether to actually make a recommendation. This further undermines his independence.

The IA's role therefore, seems to consist largely of making small financial awards, (or perhaps requiring an apology) in a very small number of cases. The IA has no authority to do anything else and the whole process is further diminished because the FOS is not actually required to follow her recommendations. If FOS decline to follow a recommendation all she can do is inform the Board, but the Board don't have to follow the recommendation either ! This is hardly a rigorous policing of FOS service standards. She provides a second level of appeal for a tiny number of complaints about FOS service standards, but the 166,312 complainants who turned to the FOS for help last year, had no independent appeal procedure at all about the quality of the advice they have received.

It could all be so much better.

I suggest the following changes to improve the authority, independence and credibility of the Independent Assessor

Selection procedure
The appointment should be made by an independent body. Perhaps the Treasury Select Committee or the Audit Commission, or any suitable independent body. Certainly the IA should not be chosen or paid by the FOS Board. Nolan standards should apply in future.

The IA should be demonstrably independent
He should have his own office and should not share staff with FOS departments. For practical reasons he may have to be based at South Quay Plaza, though it would be better if he was elsewhere. His address should not be secret. He should be paid independently, not by the body he is supposed to assess, nor should he receive fringe benefits from FOS or be in the FOS pension scheme. He should be instructed to make his decisions independently, without discussing the likely outcome with FOS Managers in advance.

He/she should have increased authority
The IA should be able to issue instructions (not 'recommendations') which must be obeyed by the FOS. This will enhance his authority and credibility and prevent FOS simply ignoring his wishes. It should be a requirement that whenever he upholds a complaint regarding the service standards of FOS, the complainant's case should automatically be independently reviewed to ensure that the decision has not been affected by the poor service standards.

He/she should be permitted to consider the merits of an Ombudsman's decision
Currently, no appeal is possible against an Ombudsman's decision, even when the IA has found low service standards and made an award of compensation. I can think of no other area in public affairs where a decision involving up to £100,000 can be taken by a single (perhaps junior) individual who produces what Anthony Speaight QC refers to as an "unappealable, summary, compulsory jurisdiction". In his recent review of the FOS, Lord Hunt was not keen on appeals but in para 4.19, he does suggest that the Service Review Team and Independent Assessor should be able to reopen some cases.

The 940 Adjudicators and Ombudsmen handled 166,312 cases last year, it is naive to pretend there were not hundreds of mistakes, perhaps as the staff rush to meet their targets and collect their incentive bonus payments. The Independent Assessor, assuming he is really independent, is an avenue though which the process of dealing with possible mistakes could be handled, provided he has the authority to require compliance with his instructions.

( To return to the main website home page please click here.)