Belgium’s financial dispute-resolution landscape has just been updated. A Belgian law adopted on 11 December 2025 (effective 3 January 2026) reshapes Ombudsfin, expanding who can file complaints and clarifying governance and procedures—changes that matter for financial institutions, businesses, and consumers operating in Belgium.

This article was written by Marc-David Weinberger of CEW & Partners

Introduction

By adopting the Law of 11 December 2025 implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of 31 May 2023 on markets in crypto-assets and Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 of 31 May 2023 on information accompanying transfers of funds and certain crypto-assets (hereafter, the “Law”), the legislator also reshaped the structure and operation of Ombudsfin, bringing it more closely in line with the Insurance Ombudsman.

While the Insurance Ombudsman’s powers and status are largely set out in the Law of 4 April 2014 on insurance, Ombudsfin’s competences were only partly included in the Code of Economic Law (CEL), with the remainder governed by its rules of procedure. In addition, Article VII.216 CEL did not cover all competences exercised by Ombudsfin, particularly those relating to companies.

Below is an overview of the main changes introduced by the Law, which entered into force on 3 January 2026, in light of the preparatory works.

1) Re-establishing Ombudsfin as a “financial mediation service” under the Law of 2 August 2002

It was considered preferable to set out Ombudsfin’s powers and operating rules within the law that governs the financial sector in a cross-cutting way, rather than within sector-specific regulation.

Accordingly, Article 136 of the Law reinstates Chapter VI of the Law of 2 August 2002 (which had been repealed by the Law of 31 July 2013) and inserts the new legal provisions there.

2) Extending jurisdiction to complaints from “potential” clients

Ombudsfin may now be seized by potential clients (who have not yet concluded a contract with a financial institution) when they allege misconduct occurring during the pre-contractual phase.

3) Broader access for legal-entity complainants

New Article 128/2 of the Law of 2 August 2002 provides that Ombudsfin may handle complaints submitted by any consumer, as well as by:

• any legal entity pursuing a non-profit purpose, or
• any company with an interest in resolving a dispute with a financial institution.

However, only companies qualifying as small or micro companies (within the meaning of Articles 1:24 and 1:25 of the Code of Companies and Associations) may file a complaint with the mediation service—unless the complaint concerns specific topics, including: the basic banking service for businesses, SME financing, credit execution, costs related to EU cross-border payments, and interchange fees applied to card payments.

4) Expanded scope and mandatory affiliation of “financial institutions”

New Article 128/4 of the Law of 2 August 2002 now requires direct (individual) affiliation for all financial institutions covered by the Law.

The list is not closed and may evolve with legislative developments; the text also includes “any other person or entity active in the financial sector whose disputes, under applicable legislation or regulation, must be capable of out-of-court settlement.”

Ombudsfin is not intended to intervene in every dispute that may arise with financial institutions, but only in those relating to activities falling within the institution’s regulated status (e.g., credit, investment services, payment services, etc.).

5) Removal of the requirement to first contact the institution’s internal complaints service

Under new Article 128/5 of the Law of 2 August 2002, only the grounds for refusing to handle complaints listed in Article XVI.25, §1, 7°, b) to h) CEL may be included in Ombudsfin’s rules of procedure.

Previously, Ombudsfin’s procedure required complainants (in line with Article XVI.25, §1, 7°, a) CEL) to first lodge a complaint with the financial institution’s internal complaints service; Ombudsfin could only be seized after that complaint had been processed or if no response was received within one month.

That condition is now removed. This does not prevent Ombudsfin—if it considers it appropriate—from referring the complaint back to the financial institution on its own initiative and inviting it to respond as the first point of contact.

6) Organisation and governance

Ombudsfin will have four statutory bodies:

1. the Ombudsman (a natural person responsible for day-to-day management and representation of the service),
2. the Supervisory Board,
3. the Board of Directors, and
4. the General Assembly.

The Supervisory Board will consist of:

• a representative of financial institutions,
• a consumer law expert,
• a representative of the FSMA,
• a representative of the FPS Economy, and
• an independent expert.

Its role includes issuing opinions to the Board of Directors—particularly on the appointment of the ombudsman and members of the panel of experts—and exercising general oversight of the service’s independence and impartiality.

7) “Prudential bridge” (information sharing with the FSMA)

New Article 128/2, 4° of the Law of 2 August 2002 allows Ombudsfin, on its own initiative, to transmit to the FSMA information necessary for the FSMA to perform its legal duties—particularly verifying the registration conditions applicable to financial institutions under its supervision.

8) “Judicial bridge” (referral by courts and tribunals)

Article 147 of the Law amends Article 1734 of the Judicial Code (mediation) to allow courts and tribunals, when seized of a matter within an ombudsman’s competence, to refer the dispute to the ombudsman—provided the ombudsman has not previously dealt with the dispute and subject to the conditions of judicial mediation.