Guide · Complaints & Disputes

Ombudsman complaints

How to define complaint scope, present evidence and keep the dispute anchored to the issues the ombudsman must decide.

An ombudsman complaint should present a defined dispute for determination, not simply forward months of correspondence.

Ombudsmen are designed to resolve eligible complaints independently after the organisation has had an opportunity to put matters right. A clear referral identifies the issues still in dispute, summarises the chronology and points to the decisive evidence.

The ombudsman already knows the organisation has a complaint process; your submission should help it understand why the final position is wrong or inadequate.

Key points

  • Check jurisdiction before investing time in a large submission.
  • State the complaint issues in numbered form.
  • Distinguish factual disputes from legal/process arguments.
  • State the remedy and how you calculated it.

A useful referral pack

  • One-page overview
  • Issue schedule
  • Chronology
  • Final response
  • Evidence index
  • Key documents
  • Remedy schedule

Explain, do not just attach

If a document is decisive, say what it proves and where the relevant passage is. Ombudsman caseworkers handle large volumes of material; navigation matters.

Anticipate the organisation’s case

Address the strongest counterargument honestly. If the firm says the balance is usage rather than an exit charge, show why that matters to your remedy rather than continuing to argue a point no longer in dispute.

In practice

  • Use the organisation’s final response as a checklist of disputed findings.
  • Keep a separate schedule for issues the organisation did not answer.
  • Update the chronology only with genuinely new events after referral.

Evidence worth keeping

Issue list
Chronology
Evidence index
Key correspondence
Final response/deadlock letter
Any decision and scheme rules/terms of reference

Read a proposed/final decision against the case you submitted.

Useful challenge structure.

“The decision records [finding]. My challenge concerns [specific factual/procedural/reasoning error], supported by [document]. This is material because it affects [issue/remedy]. Please address that point expressly.”

A review route is not usually a complete rehearing simply because you disagree with the outcome. Focus on the scheme’s permitted challenge grounds.

Ask the ombudsman to decide questions, not absorb themes.

ThemeDecision question
BillingWas the disputed charge contractually due, and if not what correction/refund follows?
Credit reportingWas the reported data accurate and fairly handled after the dispute was raised?
Complaint handlingDid the business follow the relevant process and what redress is proportionate?
EvidenceHow should the contemporaneous document be reconciled with the later account?

Numbering these questions helps you check later whether the decision actually addressed them.

State the jurisdiction and gateway.

Show why the scheme can consider you, the respondent and the subject matter, and why the complaint is in time. Include the final response/deadlock letter or the evidence showing the relevant waiting period has expired. Different schemes have different time limits and powers, so use the scheme’s current rules rather than importing another ombudsman’s procedure.

An ombudsman complaint should be an adjudication pack, not a forwarded inbox.

By the time a dispute reaches an ombudsman, the consumer should be able to identify the issues still unresolved, the business’s final position, the evidence that tests that position and the remedy sought. Start with a one-page overview and chronology, then attach only the documents needed to prove the points.