Get SAFE (Support After Financial Exploitation)

When a complaint is rejected, most people think the journey is over. It isn’t.

If you believe the Financial Ombudsman Service didn’t properly test evidence or leaned too heavily on a firm’s narrative, the key is not arguing louder — it’s escalating smarter.

We’ve just published a practical guide showing the 6 structured steps that can restore leverage, credibility, and accountability after an unfair outcome.

Because the real turning point comes when you shift from re-arguing facts to demonstrating process failure.

If you or someone you support has faced this situation, this roadmap could make all the difference.

In high-stress advocacy cases, the biggest risk is rarely the opponent. It’s unmanaged help.

Supporters usually fall into three patterns:

• The Crusader — brings energy but can escalate too fast

• The Technician — brings insight but may overstep context

• The Rescuer — brings care but can burn out suddenly

The 19% headline is being framed as a trust problem.

It’s actually a positioning problem.

When the public hears “adviser,” they hear product.

When they hear “planner,” they hear partner.

The opportunity isn’t to persuade more people to use advisers — it’s to become planners for the moments that matter.

Integrity shouldn’t be a career risk.But inside many institutions, it still is.

People who speak up about wrongdoing often face stalled promotions, reputational damage, isolation, or forced exits that can even impact their pension and long-term financial security. So they stay quiet.

And when good people stay quiet, systems don’t reform — they entrench.That’s when citizens suffer: complaints dismissed, harm denied, justice delayed.

Silence doesn’t mean nothing is wrong. It often means the cost of telling the truth is too high.

I’ve written a new Get SAFE article exploring why integrity can be punished, why systems protect themselves, and what must change if we want accountability that actually protects the public.