Central Bank publishes research on consumer perceptions of complaints handling in regulated firms

• 41% of respondents who had made a complaint said that they were treated fairly during the process.
• 39% of respondents were satisfied with how the complaint was handled.
  Respondents who had a named contact during the complaints process were more satisfied with how their complaint was handled.
• Knowledge and experience of the named contact, and timely resolution, were considered to be the most important aspects of the complaints process.
• Firms need to consider these findings and incorporate them into their processes.

The Central Bank today is publishing the findings of commissioned research undertaken to understand consumers’ perception of the complaints handling process in regulated firms. The Central Bank has put in place a strong regulatory framework for complaints handling in the Consumer Protection Code 2012 with which regulated firms must comply. In undertaking this research, the Central Bank sought to better understand consumers’ experiences and perceptions of how firms are applying this framework. 

The main findings from the research were:

• The majority of complainants had a poor opinion of several aspects of the complaints process with only 41% of respondents who made a complaint saying that they were fairly treated during the process and only 39% of respondents saying that they were satisfied with how the complaint was handled.
• 52% of respondents who were given a named contact during the process were satisfied with how their complaint was handled compared to 29% of those not given a named contact.
• The knowledge, experience and authority of the point of contact were considered to be among the most important aspects of the complaints process with 55% of respondents who had made a complaint saying that the person handling the complaint having the appropriate knowledge and experience was among the three most important aspects of the complaint process.
• 50% of respondents who had made a complaint said that timely resolution of the complaint was among the three most important aspects of the complaint process.

Director of Consumer Protection, Bernard Sheridan said: ‘In the 2015 Outlook Report, we highlighted how complaints handling, when dealt with in an open fair and transparent way, can represent an opportunity for firms to restore confidence in their relationships with consumers. This includes, being able to identify the root causes of problems to ensure that they are being resolved in a timely manner, as well as having a robust procedure that can deal with individual consumer complaints. Viewed in this way, the handling of complaints is a vital part of the ongoing relationship between firms and consumers. They also offer firms the ability to learn from and adapt their processes and procedures as necessary as well as identifying potential opportunities to improve their products and services, if they are giving rise to consumer complaints.

Some of the findings of this research cause concern in this respect, particularly in relation to consumers being treated fairly and being satisfied with how their complaint was handled. It is important that regulated firms consider the findings of this research to ensure that their approach to resolving complaints is achieving a fair outcome for consumers.’

Notes

Overview of research

Complainants had a poor opinion of several aspects of the complaints process

• Only 41% of respondents who had made a complaint said that they were treated fairly during the process.
• Only 39% of respondents were satisfied with how the complaint was handled.

Respondents who were given a named contact during the process were more satisfied with how their complaint was handled.

• 52% of respondents who were given a named contact were satisfied with how their complaint was handled compared to 29% of those who were not given a named contact.
• 70% of respondents who were given a named contact were satisfied with the outcome of their complaint compared to 55% of those who were not given a named contact.
• 62% of those who were given a named contact were satisfied that they were kept up to date throughout the process compared to 24% of those who were not given a named contact.

The knowledge and experience, and authority of the point of contact were considered to be among the most important aspects of the complaints process.

• 55% of respondents who had made a complaint said that the person handling the complaint having the appropriate knowledge and experience was among the three most important aspects of the complaint process.
• 46% of respondents said that the person handling the complaint having the appropriate authority to deal with the complaint was among the three most important aspects.

Timely resolution of the complaint was also considered an important aspect of the complaints process.

• 50% of respondents who had made a complaint said that timely resolution of the complaint was among the three most important aspects of the complaint process.

The way in which complaints are handled can have a significant impact on consumer behaviour.

• 18% of respondents who had made a complaint said that they switched provider based on how the complaint was handled.
• 51% said that they were less likely to purchase another product/service from the same firm.
• 56% said that they were less likely to recommend the firm to a friend or family member.

The two main reasons for not complaining were a belief that the problem could not be resolved or that they would not be treated fairly.

• Of those who had a reason to complain but did not do so, 43% said that they did not complain because they did not think the problem could be resolved.
• 32% responded that the reason for not complaining was that they did not have confidence they would be treated fairly.
• Other reasons for not complaining included considering the process to be too onerous (22%), not having the time (19%) or not knowing how to complain (13%).

About the commissioned research

In 2015, the Central Bank of Ireland commissioned PwC to conduct research on consumers’ attitudes and experiences of making a complaint to a financial services firm (firm) and the subsequent impact that their experience had on future behaviour relating to complaints. It further sought to explore the reasons why those who might have a reason to complain did not go on to do so.

An online survey, designed to examine and explore consumers’ experiences and perceptions of the complaints handling process, was conducted with a panel of over 1,000 consumers. The surveys were completed during November 2015 by consumers who had a reason to complain to a firm during the last five years. This was followed up, in March 2016, with a qualitative study comprising eight focus groups of 61 consumers who also had a reason to complain to a firm. These focus groups were intended to further understand consumers’ experiences of making a complaint.

The results of this research will inform our work and contribute to wider discussions with industry and policymakers both domestically and internationally in the area of complaints handling.

How to make a complaint against a regulated firm

1. Inform the Regulated Firm of Your Complaint.

Complaints against regulated firms should first be discussed with the regulated firm concerned. All regulated firms must have a complaints handling procedure in place as per our Consumer Protection Code.

2. Guide to Making a Complaint.

The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission's personal finance website has a three step guide to help you, should you wish to make a complaint against a regulated firm.

3. Refer your complaint to the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman.

If your complaint remains unresolved having gone through the regulated firms’ formal complaints process you have the right to refer the complaint to the following statutory independent bodies:

The Financial Services Ombudsman deals with complaints against regulated firms.

The Pensions Ombudsman deals with complaints about any person responsible for managing your employer pension scheme or PRSA.

4. Central Bank of Ireland

The Central Bank of Ireland has prescribed minimum requirements with which a regulated financial service provider must comply when handling a complaint. However, the Central Bank does not have the statutory function of investigating individual complaints against regulated financial service providers (which is a function of the Financial Services Ombudsman see above). Nevertheless, we welcome information from consumers of financial products on their experience and concerns in their dealings with the firms we regulate and all information received is considered in the course of carrying out our regulatory activity.