Responding to firm delays
OBSI's approach to responding to firm delays
Timely investigations are essential to OBSI’s dispute resolution process. When a dispute arises between a firm and consumer, both parties rely on us to deliver a fair and efficient resolution. Timely investigations are important to us and all our stakeholders because:
- It’s important to consumers and firms – When consumers come to us with an unresolved dispute, often the firm and consumer have already been involved in their dispute for a considerable period of time. Both parties are interested in getting to a fair resolution as quickly as possible.
- We are committed to timely service – Our timeliness service standard is that we will complete most banking-related cases in less than 60 days, almost all in less than 90 days, and all in under 120 days. For investment-related cases, we will complete most in less than 90 days, almost all in less than 120 days, and all in under 365 days.
- We are accountable to regulators – Our operations are guided by the standards set by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada under the Bank Act and the Canadian Securities Administrators through our Memorandum of Understanding.
- We are transparent about our performance – We regularly report on timeliness to stakeholders, regulators and the public through quarterly updates and our annual report.
For us to conduct effective investigations, we rely on consumers and firms to participate in our process, be available for interviews and respond to our questions in a timely way. Our efficiency depends in part on this cooperation. This document focuses on investigative delays that occur when we are working with firms: how they happen, how we address them, and how firms can help to ensure our process moves forward efficiently.
We have also published a separate document to outline our approach to dealing with delays caused by consumers and how we manage them.
How OBSI works with firms
Throughout our dispute resolution process, we work with firms to ensure that we have the appropriate information about each complaint to reach a fair outcome. Below is an overview of what we require from firms at each stage of our process and what firms can do to help to avoid delays.
Before our investigation begins
Every complaint is assessed to determine whether it falls within our mandate as set out in our Terms of Reference. Once we have determined that a case is in mandate, we initiate the following procedure:
- Case file request – We start by requesting the firm’s internal investigation file and any other relevant documents. We ask firms to respond within 21 days and on average we receive case files within 15 days. A delay can occur at this stage if a firm takes longer to provide us with a case file or does not provide a case file at all. If a document in the firm’s case file is unavailable or will take longer to provide than usual, we ask the firm to notify us. This helps our staff to manage the consumer’s expectations and keep them informed.
- Document review – Next, we carefully review the firm’s case file to determine if it is complete, if we have received the documents we requested, and whether additional documents are needed. We will only request information that is necessary and relevant.
- Follow-up – If the initial response from the firm results in an incomplete case file or no case file at all, a Case Assessment Officer (CAO) will follow up with the firm. If the CAO does not receive a response to their request, the matter is escalated to a manager. Repeated follow-ups can significantly delay our case opening process.
Once we begin our investigation
During an investigation, timely cooperation from the firm is important to keep the investigation moving forward. We may make a number of requests to ensure we understand the facts of the case and the firm’s position. Our requests can include:
- Additional information requests – Sometimes, we identify gaps or new issues in the case that require us to request more information or documentation. Typically, we ask firms to respond within five to seven days, depending on the nature and complexity of the information.
- Interviews – For some cases, we may request an interview with the advisor or the firm that is involved. While interviews are not always required for straightforward cases, they are often critical in more complex cases. We ask firms to make representatives available within a reasonable timeframe to allow our investigation to proceed efficiently.
- Case issue and settlement discussions – We may hold discussions with the firm to explain our preliminary findings and to ensure we understand its position on the issues in the case. Effective cooperation in these discussions requires that firm representatives have the appropriate knowledge and authority to speak for the firm and actively participate in settlement discussions. When the firm does not fully participate in case discussions, important issues may be left unaddressed and additional meetings will be required.
- Open communication – If a firm cannot meet a document or interview request or disagrees with it, we ask them to notify us as soon as possible. We encourage firms to explain any challenges or concerns they have about our investigations.
How we respond to delays
Firm delays during the investigation process can hinder the timely and effective resolution of our cases and affect our ability to meet timeliness service standards. When firm delays happen, we take the following steps:
- Record delays – If an investigation cannot proceed because a firm has not responded to our requests for information or an interview within a reasonable timeframe, we record a ‘firm delay’ in our case management system. This helps us to accurately track and report on the efficiency of our investigative work.
- Escalation – For extended or multiple delays, the investigator and their manager will first try to resolve the issue directly with the firm. If delays continue, a Deputy Ombudsman will contact the firm’s senior complaints representative to ensure they are aware of the situation and to determine how to best to address it.
- Adverse inference – If a firm refuses to provide information that we consider relevant to our investigation, we may draw an adverse inference. This means we may conclude that the missing information does not support the firm’s position, and we will proceed accordingly.
- Regulatory reporting – If we determine that a firm is not meeting its regulatory obligation to cooperate with our investigation, we may inform the appropriate regulator. We also submit quarterly reports to regulators, which include data on case delays.
Tips for reducing delays during an investigation
To help firms avoid common delays, below are a few practical tips based on our experience. These suggestions aim to make it easier for firms to work effectively with us and keep investigations on track.
- Provide complete documents – Avoid copying and pasting information from other documents. Instead, send us original files and documentation to preserve the proper context. This helps us to understand how the information relates to the case and reduces the need for follow-up.
- Engage decision-makers early – Involve firm representatives who have the authority to finalize decisions and approve settlement plans. Engaging them early on helps to prevent delays later in the process when timely decisions are required.
- Keep us informed – Advise us of any difficulties or challenges that may arise from our requests during the investigation. We are open to discussion if there is any disagreement about the relevance of an information request and will consider reasonable explanations. Clear communications allow us to manage the expectations of the consumer and keep the investigation on track.
Timely investigations are important to our ability to deliver fair and effective outcomes for consumers and firms. While delays will naturally sometimes occur, by working collaboratively, responding promptly, and maintaining open communication, firms can help contribute to better experiences for everyone involved.