邁入21世紀金融自由化、全球化的時代，金融服務種類益趨多樣化。觀諸近來逐日增加的金融服務紛爭，無論是常見的保險理賠爭議、證券投資風波，或是去年以來造成社會紛擾的雙卡風暴，再再讓人深刻感受到金融服務產業對消費者生活的廣泛影響。金融商品本具有其複雜性、專業性，使得消費者處於相對弱勢。發生糾紛時，僅能尋求法院管道解決，但在爭紛標的之金額、時間等訴訟成本的考量下，司法救濟通常並非解決金融消費爭端之最適手段。因此，乃有思考另一爭端解決機制之必要，專門處理金融服務業者與消費者間之糾紛，以期消費者權益能夠得到充足保護。 相較於臺灣，歐盟、美國、日本和以英國為首之部分大英國協等國家，均就金融服務消費糾紛設有解決機制。惟礙於篇幅，本文無法就上述各國制度一一探究。自80年代起，英國金融服務業開始為金融消費糾紛設立爭端解決機制，並於2000年「金融服務暨市場法」通過後，設立統一之金融服務消費糾紛爭端解決機構，因其制度發展至今可謂完備。因此，本文擬以英國之制度為主軸，探究其背景、制度和實行成效，以及對我國有關金融服務消費爭端解決的借鑑意義。

With the liberalization and globalization in the 21 century, the financial services have become diversified. Disputes arisen from financial services in the recent years show the impact of the financial services and indicate that existing settlement mechanisms couldn't effectively deal with consumer disputes. Due to the diversity and complexity of the financial services, difficulties and confusion for the customers are evident. In case of disputes, the consumers are left no other way as filing a suit to seek redress. But the relative inaccessibility of the courts as a consumer redress mechanism has its deficits in consumer protection. A speedy and informal alternative dispute resolution service to complaints, especially consumers, should be arranged. In comparison with other countries, the financial ombudsman scheme in the United Kingdom is especially notable. Since 1980s, United Kingdom has been pioneered financial services industry self-regulation with an independent ombudsman scheme. In 2000, United Kingdom passed the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) and introduced a significant new arrangement for the settlement of disputes between consumer and financial service providers. In contrast to United Kingdom, financial service industries in Taiwan have respective settlement mechanisms of consumer disputes. Through the analysis and discussion of the legal techniques in the UK, it is attempted to make a contribution to some of the issues regarding consumer protection in financial services in Taiwan.