Most removals complaints are resolved directly with the company, but when they are not, members of the British Association of Removers (BAR) are required to route unresolved complaints through a specific, independent process, rather than leaving you with no option but the small claims court. Knowing how this process actually works, and what it does and does not cover, is useful before you need it.
Why this exists and who it applies to
Since 1 April 2018, all customer complaints against a BAR member have been handled through the Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman (FHIO), which operates as a qualified, independent alternative dispute resolution (ADR) body approved under the Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes (Competent Authorities and Information) Regulations 2015. This only applies where the company was a BAR member at the time your removal took place; if you booked with a company that has never been a BAR member, this specific route is not available, though other general consumer routes, including the Consumer Rights Act itself and the small claims court, still are.
How the process actually works, stage by stage
The process starts with the trader’s own internal complaints procedure, and according to FHIO’s own published guidance, a BAR member is expected to acknowledge your complaint within three working days, and to provide a final written viewpoint no later than eight weeks after receiving it, having genuinely tried to resolve the dispute within around 15 days where possible. You are expected to go through this internal stage first; FHIO’s guidance is explicit that it can only consider a dispute with a BAR member once you have already gone through the trader’s own complaints process, or once the eight-week period has passed without a resolution.
If the internal process does not resolve the complaint, you can escalate it to FHIO, either by phone or through their application form. FHIO’s own guidance confirms this stage is free of charge to the consumer, and that its case handlers assess the dispute on an impartial, evidence-based basis rather than simply taking either side’s account at face value.
What a decision actually means
Once FHIO reaches a decision, it is binding on the trader, meaning a BAR member that has agreed to the scheme cannot simply ignore an award made against them. This is one of the genuine practical advantages of using an accredited ADR scheme over pursuing a company independently: the binding nature of the decision removes some of the enforcement uncertainty that comes with, for example, a small claims judgment against a company that may or may not actually pay up. If you accept an FHIO award, that acceptance is treated as full and final settlement, which means you cannot then bring a further claim against the same trader over the same dispute, so it is worth being confident the award reflects the full extent of your complaint before accepting it.
What ADR does not cover
FHIO’s process is not available once a dispute has already gone through the courts; the scheme exists as an alternative to litigation, not an additional route once you have already started a claim. It is also specific to BAR members using this particular scheme, so if you are comparing quotes and a company’s accreditation status matters to you, checking current BAR membership before booking, rather than assuming it, is worth doing directly through BAR’s own website rather than relying on a logo displayed on the company’s own marketing.
What this means when comparing removal company quotes
A BAR member operating under this scheme is not automatically a better or more careful company than a non-member; membership says nothing about how a specific move will actually go. What it does give you is a defined, free, binding fallback route if something goes wrong and the company will not resolve it directly, which is a genuine practical difference from a non-member where your only formal route, beyond your Consumer Rights Act protections, is the small claims court. For a large, high-value or long-distance move, that difference is worth factoring into a quote comparison alongside price.
How this differs from a general small claims court case
Going to the small claims court remains available for any consumer dispute, BAR member or not, but it is slower, involves a court fee, and requires you to actually enforce a judgment yourself if the company does not pay voluntarily, which can mean further court action through the enforcement process. An accredited ADR scheme like FHIO’s is specifically designed to avoid that second enforcement step, because the trader has agreed, as a condition of their trade association membership, to treat the Ombudsman’s decision as binding. This does not mean ADR is always the better choice; a dispute involving a genuinely large sum, or one where you specifically need a formal court judgment for other reasons, may still be better pursued through the courts. But for a typical removals dispute over damaged items or a poorly performed service, the free, binding nature of the ADR route is usually the faster and lower-risk option.
One further practical point: using the ADR scheme does not require you to give up your underlying Consumer Rights Act protections. The Ombudsman applies consumer law, including the reasonable care and skill standard, when reaching a decision, so the two are complementary rather than alternative routes to the same protection.