The regulatory authority does have at the very least the ability to make a corporate think twice before reneging on awards. The ultimate method of securing redress is through the courts against assets of the corporate. The main point about ombudsmen schemes is that the consumer is being provided with a method of seeking redress which is outside the court system. This debate is driven by a desire to improve customer confidence in cross-border retail financial services. To the extent that trade is being conducted by parties within a single Member State then the means of settling disputes remains very much an internal affair.
Real difficulties occur where the two parties come from different countries.
Looking at the possibilities from a consumer's point of view they would almost certainly wish to deal in their own language and on the basis of legal and cultural norms they are familiar with, probably they would also prefer to deal with someone geographically proximate to them. The national scheme would provide the gateway into a cross-border network of national agencies, whether voluntary or public authorities, which would arbitrate the disputes and make binding awards. The only practical way in which this could be made to work is if schemes in different countries agree to act on each others behalf in at least the enforcement element of any findings but also, possibly, the arbitration process.