The Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman Opiniones 

Very pleased with the outcome. After a lengthy battle with Wickes, who refused to accept responsibility for a costly mistake during kitchen fitting, Wickes refunded the money owed. Thank you to Matthew and team, communication was easy and online which suited me. It did take time but was worth it.

Very Disappointed – Poor Quality Sofa and No Support from Furniture Ombudsman

We bought a sofa set from Furniture Village in November 2024 and received delivery in February 2025. Sadly, the quality has been extremely disappointing for something that cost just under £4,000. Within a few months it started showing significant wear, far more than you’d expect from normal use.

When we raised this with Furniture Village, they arranged an inspection through Emmiera, which cost them £65. The technician claimed, without any actual proof, that the damage was caused by our chihuahua.

We then paid £250 for our own independent furniture report, which confirmed our concerns and even identified additional manufacturing issues. Despite sending this to Furniture Village, they refused to help and told us to go through The Furniture Ombudsman before taking legal action.

We entered the ombudsman process in good faith, expecting a fair review based on the evidence. Instead, the outcome felt completely biased in favour of the retailer:

Furniture Village was allowed to get a second report, while our independent expert wasn’t consulted again.

My requests for clarification were ignored, and I’ve still not been given a copy of the second report, despite asking several times.

After doing some research, it’s worrying to learn that The Furniture Ombudsman is funded by retailers like Furniture Village. It certainly raises questions about impartiality.

If our dog had genuinely caused the damage, we’d have owned up to it — but the issues are clearly down to poor materials and workmanship.

Overall, this has been a frustrating and unfair experience from start to finish. We would never buy from Furniture Village again, and I would urge others not to rely on The Furniture Ombudsman for a fair outcome.

Thank you for your reply, but I’d have dispute the impartiality of certainty our case, you didn’t clarify any of my queries and you gave furniture village two opportunities to do two reports and you didn’t contact our technical guy at any point so hardly think you’re impartial do you?

Dealt with Matt from ombudsman after , several unsuccessful months battling with s.c.s over very poor furniture.hr was very professional with everything and got us a full refund .cannot fault service provided...anyone having problems with their furniture I would recommend going down this route.thanks again matyhew

Made a claim to the furniture onbusman service as was not happy with the responses from the furniture company we bought expensive chairs from. The chairs bought in Sept 2023 were comfortable but very noisy ( as rockers/ recliners) within 3 months. After 5 tries via various engineers to fix the mechanisms inc replacements over the next 9 months , finally we were given a letter for 100% replacement of the chairs. These new chairs could not be found as had been discontinued. We choose new chairs without a rocking system but this was then refused by the company ,picking less costly replacements said we were only to get 60% of the costs. We then contacted Jade our ombudsman agent. She was very helpful and persistent and after a few months we received the new chairs but nothing else .No full refund of the difference which was promised.After another prolonged lull Jade finally got us the proper refund. Without the ombusman and Jade in particular we are sure we would not have sorted this ourselves.
It’s taken over a year but we are very very happy with the end result. Thank you.

I put in a complaint regarding the service I received on a sofa purchase and they processed the claim in a timely manner and kept me updated along the way

I put a claim into the ombudsman regarding payment for collection and return of an item that turned out to be the wrong item. It took a while as they had to collect information from the company I dealt with but I am pleased to say the outcome was in my favour

What an absolutely waste of time. How they can call this is a service is beyond me. My corner sofa was delivered faulty in November 2024 and there is photo evidence to prove this. Despite DFS accepting that it was delivered faulty in 2024 and the battle I’ve had with them to get it fixed, which wasn’t done until June 2025 and didn’t rectify the fault, the ombudsman has sided with them. The case wasn’t looked into properly, I didn’t speak to anybody. Just an unfair, not fit for purpose service.

Other reviewers have commented that this is not a properly independent Ombudsman and its decisions are heavily biased in favour of the companies that fund it. My experience supports that view. I referred a problem with Wren Kitchens. The Ombudsman simply repeated Wren’s assertions parrot fashion even though there was absolutely no evidence to support those assertions and the Ombudsman herself said that the onus was on Wren to prove the case! The reasoning was fundamentally flawed. No attention was paid to the points I had made.

Eventually I managed to resolve the problem with Wren Kitchens myself, no thanks to the Ombudsman. In my view, referring anything to this Ombudsman is a complete waste of time.

When my appliance sprung a leak I thought this was a straightforward warranty claim. Unbelievably it was rejected by Wickes who had already let me down badly so no surprise there. Experience with Wickes was bad but FHIO much much worse. After many long months of delay the ombudsman took a couple of hours to dismiss my claim ‘no evidence of manufacturing issue’. It’s started leaking - a seal has failed - what other evidence do you need? Apparently it was my fault ! Either they’re biased because they’re financed by the manufacturers or they’re incompetent. Complete waste of time.

Time to respond was way out of the 90 days and the response was totally sided with the retailer completely biased and none of our evidence was addressed

I was advised to use this service after a disagreement with Wren Kitchens. Initially I thought this would be a fair arbitration service overseen by the government. They claim to be:- “independent, not-for-profit, government approved”! However, it is part of a business, The Ombuds Group, which provides dispute resolution in 8 different areas. The FHIO has business members who pay an annual fee to belong – Wren Kitchens being one of those members.

I turned to FHIO after Wren Kitchens refused to replace an expensive hob, scratched by their installer. After carefully filling in the FHIO forms, I was surprised to get an assessment in only a few days, which dismissed my claim entirely based on what had been said by Wren Kitchens. There appeared to be no acknowledgement of the information provided in my submission! My attempts to contact the Ombudsperson who handled my case met with no reply to both telephone calls and emails.

I eventually emailed the most senior person at FHIO. This elicited a reply from one of his staff, who explained that the Ombudsperson who handled my case had left FHIO. Any reasonable business would have made sure that communications to an employee who had left were dealt with by someone still working there! The senior staff member reassessed my case and repeated the same reasons for refusing my claim, citing there being no evidence. I had submitted two photographs with their metadata intact. One was taken before and one after the damage. Also, I stated categorically that the only two people who had access to my flat during that time were the installer and myself. I did not cause the scratch!

My advice – don’t waste your time with FHIO – they will only side with the companies that pay their membership fees. They do not deserve to be called an Ombuds service!

My complaint was dealt with by Hannah Young. When I put the complaint in it said it could take up to 90 days but it has been dealt with long before that. Hannah was lovely, very pleasant to talk to and I’m happy with the outcome. The Company I had a complaint with has admitted the fault with the re-upholstery. So this will be sorted.

The ombudsman is not remotely impartial.
In my dispute with Wren Kitchens they flatly refused to provide an independent inspection. Instead they just wanted Wren to revisit yet again to see the work that they already claim is “within their acceptable tolerances”, when obviously their “acceptable tolerances” are not acceptable at all!

Clearly not a professional company or accredited by the UK government or audited and paid by the suppliers, FHIO is a limited company.
Personnel change and take so long to reply and no obvious review of the case, I can understand why Dodgee Solar Panel company use this knowing that complaints will never be investigated correctly, why are some many people unhappy with their experience overall?. Customers have express significant dissatisfaction with the service received, citing issues with ethics, delivery service, and contact experiences. none technical review, staff handling in my case change 4 times causing an inconsistent approach, leading to ambiguous outcomes and a lack of technical knowledge vs. useless solar company not held accountable for shoddy work, shame on you I notice Director don't leave and happy to accept so many poor reviews you should stop trading and directors of FHIO claim to do the work for free so not accountable for the service provided.

The FHIO is not independant or impartial bias towards the companies they are meant to oversee did not thoroughly investigate disregarding me the customer and refused to discuss. My solar package still does not work correctly

Hannah Young dealt with my compliant against SCS regarding my sofa being faulty and the after care from SCS customer services. They were honest from the start and informed me they were behind but my case would be looked at within 90 days. I made my contact in June 2025 and got a response and resolutions of a replacement sofa on 10th July well within the 90 days quoted, I was still having trouble with getting my replacement sofa ordered with SCS, I notified Hannah back of this on the 29th July and asked if we would receive a full refund instead, today 8th August that has now been agreed, I could not fault the way our case was handled and would advice anyone to use this service. Thank you Hannah for all you help!

What a disappointing experience. I sent in my complaint about a sofa. They responded to me stating they had contacted furniture village and took their word that there is nothing wrong with the sofa. They have not even come to do their own inspection!! They should be investigated. They are not a proper ombudsman. Paid for by the furniture companies, they just protect their own back.

The FHIO are not independent, nor competent nor are they actually a real Ombudsman (i.e. such as the Financial Ombudsman).

The FHIO are essentially a laughing stock within the industry and have historically been treated as a joke by most savvy consumers.

The above is entirely born out by the consistory poor review left on both this and other other review platforms.

Wickes wouldn’t acknowledge there was anything wrong with my new bathroom despite the water dripping through to the kitchen ceiling,
In sheer desperation I contacted the omnibudsman who dealt with it well. I ended up having a refund to cover the damage to the kitchen ceiling.after months of being ignored I got the sealant replaced and a cash sum. Will I buy anything from Wickes again - not a chance!!!but I would definitely use the ombudsman again - they were superb.

The FHIO asserts its independence, but this claim does not hold up under scrutiny. Despite extensive efforts to justify their impartiality, the reality is that the salaries of FHIO staff are funded by the very industry they are meant to oversee. This financial arrangement undermines their claim of independence.
True independence would require a balanced funding model—where both consumers and businesses contribute to the cost of dispute resolution, much like in standard contractual business disputes. Only then can the FHIO operate without perceived or actual bias.
We approached the FHIO with an open mind, expecting a fair and transparent process—but from the outset, it felt like we had already lost. WREN appeared to know exactly how to navigate the system. Rather than attempting to resolve the issue internally, they immediately passed it on to the FHIO.
Given that the FHIO is funded by the very industry it oversees, it’s difficult to accept its decisions as truly impartial. Had we paid for the process ourselves—alongside the business—it might have felt more balanced, even if the outcome was the same.
As the saying goes, no one bites the hand that feeds them. So be aware: when one side funds the system, fairness can feel very much out of reach.

A faulty toilet from Nes Home on B&Q marketplace. In order to investigate the truth of the matter, B&Q invited the Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman to intervene in this matter. Surveyor from the Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman did a visit in my house on 26th May, and then he provided a detailed investigation report. The investigation report showed that the main damage (1m width and 2m length) was caused by the leaking toilet, and there was a historical crack（20-40cm length）near the smoke detector that was indeed not related to the leaking toilet. However, B&Q believed that the 20-40cm crack near the smoke detector had nothing to do with their toilet, thus denying the relationship between the major damage (2m length and 1m width) and the faulty toilet. B&Q is helping Nes Home to shirk responsibility. The decision B&Q made is seriously inconsistent with the results shown in the investigation report.

However, there were some untrue parts in the report the Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman provided, but the investigators did not further verify it, just made random inferences, thus helping the toilet supplier to get rid of the responsibility.
The Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman didn’t act as a mediator to inform both parties (me and B&Q) of the decision? The final decision is entirely up to B&Q to respond in any way they want. There is absolutely no fairness and the process is unreasonable. The mediation process is invalid. The Furniture & Home Improvement Ombudsman and B&Q are working together to deceive consumers.