The independent assessor reviewed a complaint made to the Financial Ombudsman Service about improperly receiving personal information that was meant for another individual. While most of the complaint handling followed proper procedures, the assessor found two issues: the initial failure to promptly address the complaint, and contacting the complainant by phone when no phone number was available. The assessor recommended the service pay the complainant £150 to remedy the issues. However, payment required the complainant to provide contact details, as none were currently on file. Otherwise, the complaint handling was deemed appropriate.

1. www.independent-assessor.org.uk
independent.assessor@financial-ombudsman.org.uk
22 March 2017
Dear Mr Baird
Your complaint about the Financial Ombudsman Service: case reference 18839602
You know that I am appointed by the board of the Financial Ombudsman Service to
review complaints of poor service. I have reviewed your concerns and I have now
examined the Ombudsman Service’s case file. I have also reviewed all of the
correspondence you have sent my office.
In your communication with my office, you submitted concerns that are related to
the overall processes of the Service. You have asked me to make recommendations
for training and processes changes. I should make it clear that my role isn’t to
oversee the Ombudsman Service’s general service approaches or processes. I was put
in place to review practical case handling failures in individual cases and make
recommendations for the Ombudsman Service to put things right with the consumer
affected. The Ombudsman Service isn’t accountable to me. It is accountable to the
Board of the Ombudsman Service.
You have contacted my office about the DPA breach that took place; I have reviewed
how the Service dealt with it and if it followed its internal process accordingly. I
cannot comment further on it, as I’m not the appropriate body to comment on Data
Protection – that is better suited for the Information Commissioner’s Office.
This is my review and conclusions:
• You complain it took more emails (3) than is necessary to get this service
complaint started back in December.
On 1 December 2016 you emailed the Ombudsman Service and notified it of a service
complaint about a data breach. You copied Katie Leedale into the email. You
explained that Katie Leedale from the Ombudsman Service had emailed you
containing another person’s personal information. You asked whether the data
subject had been informed and the ICO. You referred to the service complaints leaflet
and looked forward to a full response from a team manager.
The adjudicator, Katie Leedale replied the next day and completely failed to address
your concern, even though your email couldn’t have been any clearer. You replied
the same day and stated, “So that you understand and take this concern seriously, emails

2. Independent Assessor
22 March 2017
2
sent to me on 25/04/16,29/04/16, 03/05/16, 06/05/16 etc are unsolicited and contain
information personal to some other individual called Alan Baird.” You asked for a team
manager response as referred to in the service compliant factsheet.
Miss Leedale replied on 6 December 2016 and confirmed that she had escalated your
complaint. On 13 December 2016 her manager, Dee Kasthuri emailed you to let you
know that she was looking into your complaint and she’d called you as she wished
to discuss it with you.
So, you had to write twice before the Ombudsman Service identified you wished to
make a service complaint. I think that was unnecessary as it was clear from your first
email you were invoking the service complaint process as you had been sent
information about someone else and asked that a team manager respond.
I was concerned that Miss Leedale didn’t explain when she first wrote to you the
mistake she had made by adding an email to your case that belonged to someone
else. It was an innocent mistake and that explanation could have saved a lot of time
and effort. Instead you were left chasing an explanation and she initially ignored it
altogether.
• You say that it is correct other people have the team manager stage
complaint completed in a couple of weeks but you had to wait over this
amount. Taking 2 weeks off for Christmas still makes 4 weeks which is
more than 2. You complain no recognition of this has been shown by the
FOS.
The team manager took longer than expected to respond to you. This was because
she liaised with the security and data protection teams to ensure the Ombudsman
Service had followed the correct process. She had to contact the affected consumer
too. She was on annual leave during the Christmas and New Year holidays. She
responded to you on 18 January 2017. So, the response took 6 weeks but the time was
unavoidable as necessary enquiries had to be made by her before she could respond
to you.
On 16 February 2017, the senior manager Louise Brewer apologised for the delay in
the response and explained why it took longer than she would have hoped but that
the delay was unavoidable.
• You question whether FOS actually understood the DPA complaint since
they admitted trying to telephone some other individual during the team
manager stage. You say that even after the first stage, the team manager,
Dee, still asked you if you had received a cheque they had sent (despite
only having your email address for contact). You refer to Dee’s response of
18 January 2017 where she shows lack of understanding.
I have checked and the team manager understood the complaint you made. In her
email of 18 January 2017 she addressed your complaint about receiving emails not
intended for you. She also asked if you had received a cheque for £100 which had
been issued following my recommendations on another service complaint. I was

3. Independent Assessor
22 March 2017
3
concerned to see that despite not having an address for you the Ombudsman Service
sent the cheque for £100 to another customer. The Service still does not have an
address for you so if you would like the payment still you need to provide one to it
or give it your bank details so it can pay you into your bank account.
Miss Brewer also understood your complaint. In her response of 16 February 2017
she addressed your complaint about receiving emails not intended for you. She
informed you the team manager had incorrectly called another customer to discuss
your concerns but there was no answer and no facility to leave a message so none of
your personal details were disclosed. I was surprised to see the team manager had
made such a call as the records show the Ombudsman Service didn't hold a
telephone number for you as you later pointed out to her when she emailed you
stating she had tried to call you.
• You complain you asked what role and department was responsible for
allocating your email address to some other person’s case. But this has not
been answered you would like to know.
• You complain Dee says it’s up to the FOS to decide who is most
appropriate to investigate internally (respond to your service complaint).
You question the effectiveness of this and if dealing with a situation 3rd
hand is worthwhile and should be changed.
On 18 January 2017 the team manager explained how the mistake occurred and it is
apparent from her response who it was done by. She explained, “The issue occurred as
an email from you in April 2016 was added to the system without verifying if this was the
correct email address for the other consumer. This was contrary to our policy and as we've
spoken with the individual responsible for this error.
It wouldn't be appropriate to comment on the performance of individuals. But I would like to
reassure you that we take data protection very seriously, and the individual has been informed
of the consequences of her actions. This incident was reported to our security team and
subsequently to our data protection officer.”
As the senior manager correctly explained, the manager for the person responsible
for the error responded to your service complaint as they were best placed to deal
with it. That is in line with the normal process.
• You question if it’s appropriate for a department not having anything to do
with the DPA breach to deal with the complaint. If not, you'd like this
service complaint to be started again from the beginning by the correct
department so they can actually learn from the experience. You say you'd
get the answers you want directly rather than speculation.
It is up to the Ombudsman Service how it runs its operation including its complaints
process. I have checked and your service complaint followed the correct process.
• You complain FOS refused to send you proof that the other individual was
aware of this issue. DPA was the grounds for refusal. Louise said “It would
not be appropriate to send you a copy of this correspondence as it contains

4. Independent Assessor
22 March 2017
4
another individual's address.” You say this is fair enough but you have
already been sent the address with personal details and the FOS could have
redacted these from the letter. You would like FOS to send you this proof
with the address details etc removed.
The Ombudsman Service will not share another person’s information with you just
as you were aggrieved it sent you information by mistake about another person. The
Ombudsman Service has explained to you why it will not do so and has given you
assurances the other person has been notified of what has happened. I have no
concerns about how it has responded to you about this.
OPINION and RECOMMENDATIONS
I am not satisfied Miss Leedale acted promptly to your request that a team manager
respond to your service complaint about receiving emails from her intended for
someone else. You had to email twice before it was actioned. I am not satisfied the
team manager acted reasonably in making a call intended for you to discuss your
complaint when the Service held only your name and email address and no phone
number for you.
I am satisfied in all other respects of your service complaint the Ombudsman Service
handled your case as it should have done.
The Ombudsman Service has apologised to you. In addition, I recommend it pay you
£150 for the trouble and upset caused. It will write to you if it accepts my
recommendation.
As you know the Ombudsman Service does not hold a postal address for you to send
you a cheque. If you wish to receive a cheque you need to let it have an address to
send it to. If you would prefer a payment into your bank account, you need to let it
have the account name, bank sort code and account number. If it doesn’t receive any
of this information from you, it cannot make this payment of £150 or any previous
payment that is outstanding.
As my opinion is final I have closed my file so I will not be corresponding further on
this case. I do not intend to be discourteous but I am letting you know any
correspondence you may send will be read and added to my file but not responded
to.
Yours sincerely
Ms Amerdeep Somal
Independent Assessor

5. Independent Assessor
22 March 2017
5