Partially upheld: poor claims handling, failure to meet regulatory deadlines, inadequate communication complaint against Fullbrook Associates Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr J and Mrs J complained to Fullbrook Associates Ltd about its handling of timeshare agreement termination and section 75 claims against multiple lenders. The ombudsman determined that complaints about timeshare termination fall outside its jurisdiction. However, the complaint about section 75 claims handling was upheld because Fullbrook failed to timely refer Mrs J's complaint against lender T to the Financial Ombudsman Service, causing it to become time-barred, and failed to provide clear communication about claim progress in breach of CMCOB guidance. The ombudsman ordered Fullbrook to pay £350 compensation for distress and inconvenience, rejecting Mr J's request for a higher amount.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that complaints about timeshare termination fall outside FOS jurisdiction as they do not constitute regulated activities under the RAO. However, section 75 claims handling does fall within jurisdiction as it relates to financial services or financial product claims. Fullbrook's failure to timely refer Mrs J's complaint against lender T deprived her of the opportunity to have her complaint considered by the ombudsman. Additionally, Fullbrook failed to provide clear and adequate communication about the progress of the section 75 claims in breach of CMCOB guidance. The £350 compensation recommended by the Investigator was considered fair and reasonable given the scope of the decision was limited to section 75 claims only.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website