Acts Online
GT Shield

Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, 2002 (Act No. 37 of 2002)


Proceedings of the Office of the Ombud for Financial Services Providers Amendment Rules, 2004

4. Type of complaint justiciable by Ombud


(a) For a complaint to be submitted to the Office—
(i) the complaint must fall within the ambit of the Act and these Rules;
(ii) the person against whom the complaint is made must be subject to the provisions of the Act (hereafter referred to as "the respondent");
(iii) the act or omission complained of must have occurred at a time when these Rules were in force; and
(iv) the respondent must have failed to address the complaint satisfactorily within six weeks of its receipt.

[Rule 4(a) substituted by section 4 of Board Notice 100, GG26844, dated 29 September 2004]

(b) A complainant may seek any relief relating to the subject matter of the complaint, but a complaint constituting a claim for a monetary award, must relate to the redress of financial prejudice or damage suffered or likely to be suffered by the complainant.
(c) The complaint must not constitute a monetary claim in excess of R800 000,00 for a particular kind of financial prejudice or damage, unless the respondent has agreed in writing to this limitation being exceeded, or the complainant has abandoned the amount in excess of R800 000,00.
(d) The Ombud may also entertain a complaint relating to a financial service rendered by a person not authorised as a financial services provider or by a person acting on behalf of such person.
(e) When the Ombud receives a referral from the registrar as contemplated in section 4(4)(c) of the Act, the Ombud must in writing notify the client concerned thereof and require the client to inform the Ombud whether the client wishes to pursue the complaint in accordance with the provisions of Part I of Chapter VI of the Act.
(f) The complaint must not relate to the investment performance of a financial product which is the subject of the complaint, unless such performance was guaranteed expressly or implicitly or such performance appears to the Ombud to be so deficient as to raise a prima facie presumption of misrepresentation, negligence or maladministration on the part of the person against whom the complaint is brought, or that person's representative.