A Comparative Research Of Consumer Dispute Resolution Mechanism Set Up By The Financial Supervision And Regulation Department Between Britain And Japan

This paper mainly introduces the current problems in the UK, Japan’s Consumer Dispute Resolution Mechanism set up by the Financial Supervision and Regulation Department, and this system is compared between the two countries and put forward the significance of reference to China.For the purpose of this paper is to set up a system involved in order to solve the financial consumer disputes, so we first introduce the concept of consumer finance and financial consumer as background knowledge. With the development of China’s financial market, financial consumer disputes happened frequently, both of the number of cases and complexity are in growing, our country’s existing trial, arbitration and mediation of the third way to solve disputes although also in normal operation, and also according to our country have done some reform and innovation activities, the present situation increasingly reflects its limitations, such as the trial ’s long cycle, high cost, as the financial consumers often at a disadvantage because of an inadequate reserves in the capital, knowledge, experience and so on.And conciliation is the lack of enforcement, therefore, we will take an eye to abroad, to find a means to reduce the above limitations as a dispute settlement mechanism.In 2000, the establishment of new England financial regulator-- the Financial Services Authority(referred to as FSA) established a Financial Ombudsman Service(referred to as FOS) organization through the financial market Services Act(FSMA), the organization may mediate on the various types of financial consumption disputes.Meanwhile, if the mediation fails, the dispute also can be judged, and the judge also has the effect of enforcement. Such a mechanism is apparently able to eliminate the limitations mentioned above. Since then, such a system has gradually spread, in many countries and regions have established a similar mechanism to deal with the financial consumer disputes. In fact, as early as the late 80’s in the last century, Britain had begun their pace of financial reform, They set up a series of organizations with the functions of both mediation and judgment, such as banking Ombudsman, building societies Ombudsman, the Ombudsman of investment, insurance Ombudsman. FOS which established in 2000, is a unified integration processing financial consumption dispute settlement organization set up based on these organizations. Therefore, the British FOS passed a process from division to integration.After the 90’s of last century, in Japan,as Ryutaro Hashimoto was the Prime Minister,they also copied the British financial reform, carried out the financial reform movement called the Japanese version of the financial "Big Bang", among all the measures, Japan also established financial ADR mechanisms just like British FOS. However, until today,the financial ADR mechanisms in Japan is still in a state of separation,while not reach the integration type, a cross-sectional jurisdiction.But in Japan, according to the plan, Japan will be based on these financial institutions to set up an ADR on a horizontal integration as the dispute settlement mechanism, in the running process of the system, the mediation center of the securities and financial products has emerged(FINMAC) and so will other institutions for horizontal coordination within the industries of the financial ADR mechanism operation organization. Therefore, we can regard Japan’s financial ADR as a state before the integration brand of dispute resolution agencies, and Japanese financial ADR is the combination of mediation and judgment function, its nature is same as FOS. Therefore, in this paper, without special instructions, we will also regard the Japanese financial ADR as a kind of FOS.Firstly, a general introduction to the countries which set the FOS systems in the world will be given, to classify the types of the FOS systems in these countries with the integration degree as the standard of cation, which can be divided into the complete integration type FOS system, quasi integration type FOS system and FOS system of industry. In these three types of FOS system, fully integrate type and industry type FOS system are the two of the most typical and the most representative types, but the quasi integration type FOS system owes the "type" of complete integration and "soul" of the industry system, and used by fewer countries(only in Canada), is not representative, so we discuss the complete integration type and industry type FOS systems. Britain and Japan are the representatives of the two systems. Then we come to the UK and Japan’s FOS systems to make detailed analysis, including its history, organization structure, source of funds, under the jurisdiction of content, work goal, work flow, implementation effect etc. And compare the characteristics of FOS systems and the traditional judicial means, arbitral way, pointing out its exist advantage. After introducing the above content between the two FOS systems, we will compare the systems of the two countries with each other, list the similarities and differences. During our comparison of the two FOS systems’ similarities and differences,we will not only list the similarities and differences, but also make analysis of these similarities and differences, to find out the reasons of existence of the similarities and differences between the two systems, such as in the integration degree, we list the differences between the two systems, but also point out the development target of ADR, Japan’s financial consumer dispute settlement system,is to build a transverse integration dispute resolution mechanism, which more clearly highlight the link between the systems of two countries.As the phrase Outside the Box experiences, we have respectively introduced the characteristics of British FOS and Japanese Financial ADR systems, and made a comparison between them, then we can make reference to it, with which to solve our currently encountering limitations in the trial, mediation and other ways mentioned above. The first is the reform of the financial regulatory agencies of the two countries reference, their current regulation modes are mixed supervision, and set up or are about to set up FOS mechanism cross-sectional in mixed supervision system, the purpose of this paper is not to discuss the reform of financial supervision mode, but because of the financial regulators and the Financial Ombudsman system also have close relation, so we first discuss it. Then we will talk about the FOS’s way of establishing and developing mode in China. Firstly,we will extract this aspect of FOS systems in Britain and Japan, combined with the particularity of China’s own national conditions--- China financial industry regulatory authority and Chinese people generally believe that more background of the official unit with more fairness and neutrality, put forward a set of suitable FOS mechanism with Chinese characteristics of the establishing and developing pattern for China. Finally, according to the content of Britain FOS and Japanese Financial ADR mechanism’s running process, combined with our existing legal system, we carry on the design to China to set up an FOS workflow, including the admissibility of complaints, mediation, litigation and the referee of docking with other methods, set up the frame of the whole process.FOS system can play a positive role in our country’s current backround of financial consumer disputes being increasing and more and more complicated, and should also be able to effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of financial consumers. In this paper, through the discussion of British and Japanese consumer dispute resolution systems set up by Financial Supervision and Regulation Department---British FOS and Japanese Financial ADR, put forward feasible suggestions on the system level which can solve the existing financial consumption dispute in China.