The Ombudsman had found that the applicant had unfairly failed to notify its customers of the availability of better accounts, once it discontinued accounts of one type. The Society appealed saying that the finding of unfairness arose from matters outside the scope of the Code.
Held: The finding did go outside the strict range of the Code. Nevertheless, the code was to be interpreted in a purposive, and non-technical way, and the Ombudsman had some considerable discretion. There were arguments each way as to the fairness or unfairness of the decision, but the court could only intervene if the decision was so bad as to be irrational. That was not the case here.
Citations:
Times 13-Dec-2002, [2002] EWHC 2379 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Monopolies and Mergers Commission, ex parte South Yorkshire Transport Ltd HL 1993
One bus company took over another, giving it an effective monopoly within the region. The Commission considered that the area involved was sufficiently substantial to cause concern that it may operate against the public interest. At first instance . .
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Passenger Rail Franchising, Ex Parte Save Our Railways and Others Etc CA 18-Dec-1995
A requirement that new services should be ‘based upon’ the present timetables did not mean that the services had to be at same level. It was possible that they may be a lesser service, though there should be no significant departures from such . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Financial Services, Consumer, Commercial
Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.178117
