The Financial Services & Pensions Ombudsman can refuse to investigate a complaint referred to it by a consumer on the grounds that the: (i) complaint is frivolous or vexatious. (ii) consumer failed to comply with a request for further information within a reasonable time. (iii) consumer has insufficient interest in the conduct complained of. A (i) and (ii) only. B (i) and (iii) only. C (ii) and (iii) only. D (i), (ii) and (iii).

• A. A (i) and (ii) only.
• B. B (i) and (iii) only.
• C. C (ii) and (iii) only.
• D. D (i), (ii) and (iii).

Answer: (D)

The key idea is that the ombudsman has discretion to refuse to investigate a complaint if certain conditions undermine a fair, efficient review. It can refuse a referral when the complaint is frivolous or vexatious, meaning it lacks seriousness or is intended to cause trouble rather than seek a genuine resolution. It can also refuse if the consumer hasn’t provided information requested in a reasonable time, because without timely information there isn’t enough basis to assess the case. Additionally, if the consumer doesn’t have a sufficient interest or standing in the conduct complained of, there’s no proper basis for the ombudsman to take the matter up.

Because each of these are legitimate, independent grounds for refusal, all three together form the correct set of reasons. Relying on only one or two of them would overlook other valid reasons the ombudsman may decline to investigate. In short, the ombudsman may refuse for frivolous or vexatious reasons, for failure to provide information promptly, or for lack of sufficient interest.