Rory Percival, FCA technical specialist, said small variances might be picked up on an individual case but he stressed that there was nothing “systemic” or “fundamental” in any differences between the two organisations.
Mr Percival said: “The ombudsman is staffed by humans, we’re staffed by humans, contrary to popular opinion. There will be differences between humans in dealing with a subject that is as subjective as suitability.”
Speaking at the Paraplanners Powwow on Thursday, he said: “So you might be able to pick up on an individual case which you might say contradicts something Rory or the FCA said, you might be able to do that but that’s not the point. The point is there are no systemic differences between the ombudsman and ourselves.”
{desktop}{/desktop}{mobile}{/mobile}
He challenged advisers earlier this year to come forward with evidence if they felt there was a difference in approach between the FOS and FCA. Some did and claimed their cases showed proof of this.
Mr Percival said: “Some people missed the point and actually sent me individual cases, saying this clearly demonstrates there is a difference between the FCA and FOS. I actually looked at them and thought ‘no we agree with the FOS on these cases’ but I couldn't say that because it’s an independent organisation the FOS and it’s not for us to judge.
“The point I was making was if there was a fundamental difference between the FOS and ourselves that would manifest itself in widespread differences in particular categories of cases and there is no evidence of that.”
He said: “If you look at the FOS decisions, and they have published everyone that goes to an ombudsman for the past four to five years now, so there’s lots of them, I’ve read quite a few of them, several dozen, and I haven’t disagreed with any yet. “They all seem to be aligned with what we believe in different scenarios.”