header-logo header-logo

02 June 2017 / Michel Reznik
Issue: 7748 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Injustice in financial services disputes (Pt 3)

nlj_7748_reznik

Michel Reznik reviews the principles of effective dispute resolution & endorses the introduction of a Financial Services Tribunal

  • Specialist dispute resolution forums are necessary in markets in which David habitually fights Goliath.
  • The Employment, Intellectual Property and Competition jurisdictions are examples where specialist disputes forums have proved essential to give David a chance at justice.
  • Adopting the specialist Financial Services Tribunal suggested by Richard Samuel would bring justice within the reach of SMEs.

Since the financial crisis, banks and financial services institutions have been exposed by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) for mis-conducting themselves, and, in particular, for mis-selling financial products to their SME (small and medium-sized enterprise) clients on an industrial scale. This reputation has been galvanised in the minds of the public by widely-publicised outcomes of investigations into scandals and by enormous fines meted out by regulatory bodies.

Victims of misconduct have rightly expected compensation. The question has been and remains: how and where are they going to get it? The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS)

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll