I know we sometimes arbitrarily compare Ofcom with the FSA, but the two regulators are fairly similar. Ofcom and the FSA are new, ultra-hip converged regulators that cover the two most basic elements in society: You know, television and money. Also, both regulators were featured in the Hampton Review Final Report as ‘merged’ regulators (Ofcom - 5 legacy regulators, FSA - 9 legacy regulators) that basically function as role models for future regulatory reform.

Anyway, continuing our recent theme of Ofcom’s website and how the regulator arrays information, I thought it would be interesting to compare how the FSA and Ofcom each provide information to consumers desiring to make a complaint about service received in the marketplace. Basic stuff for a regulator, right?

First, a note on methodology: I consumed several glasses of red wine, ate some chocolate-covered raisins, and pretended I was a consumer with a complaint and no familiarity with either regulator. This is what you might call LBBR - low budget blogger research.

Here’s the scoop:

FSA - two options:

1. Click on ‘consumer information’, then click on ‘consumer publications’, then you will see ‘FSA guide to making a complaint’ as the fourth-listed publication. One more click (totaling 3) and you get the information you need.

2. Enter ‘complaint’ in the search field. The guide is the third-listed publication. Two clicks total.

And the guide? Not bad. It covers a complicated area and numerous types of financial services, but the guide is common-sense and it contains the types of questions most consumers would likely ask (’what to do if a firm has gone out of business’).

Ofcom - two options:

1. Click on ‘help and advice for consumers’. Yikes - either the red wine has taken hold of me, or this immediately became confusing. First, there are three options - I have to pigeonhole myself: Am I a listener, viewer, or ‘telephony consumer’? Oh, wait - ‘contact Ofcom’ has a link entitled ‘tv or radio programme complaints’. Click on that. Not bad. It’s not a full-fledged guide and is a bit jumpy in terms of coverage, but it should work for most consumers. Two clicks.

Telephony consumer also has ‘how to complain’ featured on the intro page, so I clicked that as well. Click on the only choice: ‘alternative dispute resolution’. Similar to the ‘tv and radio complaints’ page, the telecoms complaints page has several links and is generally easy to follow. Three clicks total. Problem: Why does Ofcom use terms like ‘telephony consumer’ and ‘alternative dispute resolution’? These seem like legalistic and overly-complicated terms. Also, telephony, to an average consumer, might not cover things like prepaid calling cards and similar items.

2. Enter ‘complaint’ in the search field. Again, the confusion commences. [he reaches for bottle of red wine] The fourth-listed item specifies how to make a telecoms-related complaint… but (no joke) it is a different telecoms complaint page than the one accessed through the ‘help and advice for consumers’. I didn’t compare the pages in an exhaustive manner, but the page found through the search engine is definitely not the same page. That’s odd. Otherwise, the information is useful and helpful. The search result for consumer complaints related to broadcasting was not even on the first page of search results - it was mid-way down the second page. That’s unacceptable, particularly when higher-placed search results have illustrative titles such as ‘Summary, Document found in: Transposition of Broadcasting Act Licenses’. I’m not kidding.

My take. Ofcom are trying hard and still somewhat new to the game, but the FSA beats them by a long shot. The FSA’s comprehensive guidebook for complaints is a model for other regulators. It’s well-written and easy to access from the website. Ofcom, by comparison, do not fare well in ‘convergence’ terms - the information is scattered in several places divided by industry sector, and possibly leaves the consumer confused. In fact, OfcomWatch sometimes receives consumer complaints that we re-direct to Ofcom. Ofcom should produce one .pdf document that contains all the information a consumer would need to know in order to complain about any product or service regulated by Ofcom (or not regulated by Ofcom with appropriate links to other regulators). Ofcom could also do well by reviewing what the FCC does with respect to complaints.

Or stated another way (viewing Ofcom as a role model): Ofcom needs to be as rigorous in measuring its own performance on basic tasks as it is in measuring others’ performance.

Your take? Comments / questions to: blog@ofcomwatch.co.uk