Knowledge Hub · Knowledge Hub

Redress: putting a problem right

Redress is the formal word often used for putting a consumer back in the position they should have been in, or providing another fair remedy where that is not possible.

Redress is the action taken to put a consumer back, as far as possible, in the position they would have been in if the problem had not occurred.

Redress is broader than compensation. It can include refund, correction, re-performance, account adjustment, deletion/correction of a marker, apology, interest, reimbursement, reconsideration or practical service action.

The right remedy depends on the wrong and the harm. A payment alone may be inadequate if inaccurate data remains on a credit file; a correction alone may not reimburse proven financial loss.

Key points

  • Identify the primary corrective action first.
  • Add financial redress where actual loss/distress/inconvenience warrants it.
  • Avoid arbitrary round numbers without explaining basis.
  • Compare the remedy with the position absent the error.

Types of redress

Restitution/correctionRefund, account correction, data rectification, re-performance.
Financial lossReimburse loss caused by the error.
Distress/inconvenienceScheme/court-specific recognition where available.
InterestMay compensate for being kept out of money, depending on route.
Non-financialApology, explanation, policy/service change.

Proportionality

A remedy should follow from findings. If a decision accepts serious failings but offers a remedy that leaves the consumer significantly worse than an earlier offer, the reasoning should explain why that is fair and proportionate.

Start with the counterfactual: what should have happened?

A disciplined redress calculation asks where the consumer would probably be if the problem had not occurred. That may mean returning money, removing an incorrect marker, re-performing a service, restoring an account position, refunding consequential costs, paying interest or compensating non-financial impact. This helps distinguish genuine restoration from a goodwill payment that leaves the underlying problem untouched.

Avoid double counting

Different heads of redress can overlap. If one payment already compensates a specific financial loss, do not count the same loss again under inconvenience. Keep direct financial loss, consequential costs, interest and non-financial impact separate, and explain the evidence for each. Where an ombudsman uses published compensation bands or guidance, treat them as context rather than automatic tariffs unless the scheme says otherwise.

In practice

  • State what must be corrected before discussing goodwill.
  • Show calculations for financial loss.
  • Explain causation.
  • Distinguish settlement offers from findings of legal liability.