The review on banking sector complaints follows a concurrent review of the ombudsman service's investment complaints handling
A second review of Canada’s banking and investment ombudsman service includes a renewed call for greater autonomy in its decisions.
Earlier this year, the first report focusing on the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments (OBSI)’s operations said that it should have binding authority on the decisions it makes when handling investment complains.
The same conclusion has now been published in respect of banking complaints.
Independent reviews of OBSI’s operations are conducted every five years and the latest ones were conducted concurrently by Professor Poonam Puri, one of Canada’s leading experts in corporate governance, corporate law, and securities law.
The findings of the banking complaints handling were delivered to OBSI’s board and the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC), which oversees External Complaints Bodies (ECBs) for Canada’s federal banking sector.
The report noted that the ombudsman service had handled record numbers of banking-related complaints in 2021 without delay, and that it had taken steps to improve its service delivery.
An earlier OBSI report showed that banking-related complaints were up 55% in 2021 to 514 cases, led by credit card issues
ECB assessment
The review noted that Canada’s multi-ECB system raised concerns, as highlighted by FCAC in 2020, that “competition among ECBs was not consistent with international standards, introduced inefficiencies and complexity for consumers and negatively affected consumers’ perceptions of the fairness and impartiality of the system.”
However, it said that considering a single ombudsman for banking complaints was outside of its remit.
The report concluded that OBSI had met and exceeded its obligations under the Bank Act Complaints Regulations and the requirements under the Commissioner’s Guidance-13, and found that:
- OBSI has dealt with complaints in a timely manner;
- Investigators were able to identify key issues in a complaint and requested additional documents where necessary;
- Investigators were skilled at conducting interviews and assessing credibility;
- Investigators kept the parties apprised of progress in the investigation, were candid with the parties about the merits of the case, and explained their views well and as early as possible;
- Decision reasons were fair, proportionate, and were explained in plain language; and
- Case conclusions flowed from the evidence.
