2015年金融消費者保護法於第13條之1增訂團體評議制度，希冀能一致且迅速的處理同一原因事實所造成的金融消費爭議事件，以節省有限之評議資源。然而金融消費者僅能將其評議實施權授與給主管機關指定的金融相關之財團法人或公益社團法人，實有悖於金融消費者保護法之立法目的，而過度注重公益性之確保，忽略有效處理評議事件之重要性。因此，現行法規定可謂不當限制受指定法人之範圍，並妨礙團體評議制度效用之發揮。本文認為制度設計上應落實「權利導向」之政策性思考，建議刪除主管機關之個案指定權，並對於各具有適格性之法人所制定之「受理案件程序與標準」為「原則基礎之監理」。至於受指定法人的組織設計，則可考慮採用兼具公私性質者，或具私益性質者。

In 2015, Financial Consumer Protection Act amended Group Ombudsman at Article 13-1, expected to handle financial consumption disputes with the same cause and fact, and saved the limited resources of Financial Ombudsman Institution. However, financial consumers can solely authorized litigation rights to the finance related incorporated foundation or incorporated charitable association designated by the competent authority, has breached the legislative intent of Financial Consumer Protection Act, over-emphasized the maintaining of the public welfare, and neglected the importance of handling financial consumer disputes effectively. Therefore, current regulation has improperly constrained the range of the designated group, making Group Ombudsman non-effective. This research suggests that Article 13-1 of Financial Consumer Protection Act should remove the designating right by the competent authority, based on the policy thinking of“right-based”,also, adopt principle- based supervisory on the case entertained process and standard which enacted by the qualifying group. Regarding the organizational design of the designated group, may adopt the public-private mixed structure, or private ones.