Assetz SME Capital, Escalation to CIFAS
If the issuer rejects your complaint or fails to respond, we escalate directly to CIFAS. This challenges the member organisation for breaching CIFAS filing standards and usually runs alongside the Ombudsman route.
CIFAS will review the member's compliance with filing standards
What this stage means
This is a complaint to CIFAS itself, not about the marker directly, but about whether Assetz SME Capital followed the CIFAS filing standards when they placed it. CIFAS oversees its members and can investigate whether the filing was compliant. This stage is most effective when it runs alongside the Ombudsman route rather than as a standalone step.
When you reach this stage
You reach this stage after Assetz SME Capital has rejected your initial complaint or failed to respond within 8 weeks. We normally file the CIFAS complaint at the same time as the Ombudsman referral so both escalation routes are active together.
What they will assess
- Whether Assetz SME Capital met the CIFAS standard of proof before filing
- Whether Assetz SME Capital conducted a proper investigation
- Whether the marker category was appropriate for the circumstances
- Whether Assetz SME Capital followed the correct filing procedure
- Whether notification requirements were met
What strengthens your case
- Evidence that Assetz SME Capital's filing did not meet CIFAS standards
- The issuer's response (or non-response) to your initial complaint
- Specific references to which filing standards were breached
- Evidence that the investigation was inadequate or automated
- Simultaneous FOS referral, shows you are pursuing all available routes
What we provide at this stage
- Formal complaint to CIFAS about member conduct
- Evidence that filing standards were not met
- Reference to the issuer's response (or lack of response)
- Request for CIFAS to investigate the marker
What you need for this stage
- The issuer's response to your complaint (or proof of non-response)
- Your original CIFAS report
- Any new correspondence received since the initial complaint
Common outcomes at this stage
CIFAS investigates and contacts Assetz SME Capital about compliance
The institution agrees to review the marker under CIFAS pressure
CIFAS finds no breach but the investigation itself creates pressure
Combined with the FOS complaint, Assetz SME Capital settles before a decision is made
What happens next
The CIFAS complaint should normally run alongside the Ombudsman referral. Many institutions settle when they face both escalation routes at once, and that dual pressure often leads to marker removal before either body makes a formal decision.