Financial Ombudsman Service - Have your Say

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

I can view IP's and was watching who's online (it shows us what threads guests are in plus their IP)

That was the plan no doubt as you did put the forum on the IA letter lol

[helmsman]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

I can view IP's and was watching who's online (it shows us what threads guests are in plus their IP)

If they are looking in today, pull your fingers out I am into 2nd year now,

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

My PPI Claim started In March 2008 with the bank and got a deadlock letter in Dec 2008 referred to FOS Dec 2008 and was finalised and offer accepted by me not the FOS in Jan 2011

[Batman]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint


The complaint and who it was against:


Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS) (7 accounts) in respect of:

Multiple mis selling of Payment Protection Insurance Policies
Breaches of Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidelines
Harassment by 3rdParty Agencies instructed by HBOS
Breaches of Data Protection Act 1998
Breaches of Consumer Credit Act 1974


The names of the persons dealing with your complaint:
Several FOS operatives: Jade Tavares, Nathan Horner, Jo White, Patrick Ellis , Bridget Moran, Adrian Royal , Amanda Burrows, Tiffany Lau, Dennis Charman, David Hyde , Ryan Moony, Alice Clilverd,

The outcome:


Basically FOS agreed with HBOS that the bank had acted properly, regardless of many detailed documents presented to them over several years proving that they had ‘not’. However, Alice Clilverd did say: “I agree that the actions of the Bank of Scotland and Halifax have on occasion not been in line with that I would expect.”



Nevertheless, she still went on to take the bank’s main position, even though this is a clear case of all that is claimed:


Multiple mis selling of Payment Protection Insurance Policies
Breaches of Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidelines
Harassment by 3rdParty Agencies instructed by HBOS
Breaches of Data Protection Act 1998
Breaches of Consumer Credit Act 1974

The only compensation offered by the bank was £300.00 relating to telephone harassment in 2007.



NB. We have taken several DCAs (who have all closed their files after we challenged them) to task and won several amounts of compensation from them as they clearly know that the HBOS accounts they had pursued along with their most belligerent solicitors were flawed. The FOS has largely ignored this fact.

Any grievances that suggest you were mistreated.

The FOS seemed to be at loggerheads with itself after one of their workers (Dennis Charman) made the following declaration (August 2011) to us on the phone:


“if the contract is unenforceable your wife should not have paid a single penny back whether it be PPI or any of the principle amounts that she borrowed because an unenforceable contract they cannot collect a penny on.”


September 2011. FOS’s David Hyde rang us about HBOS PPI. He claimed to have NO RECORD of the last call from Dennis Charman. We however have the tape. We then received several more unnecessary calls off FOS.



In October 2011 FOS awarded us with £150.00 compensation following unwanted phone calls from FOS.


Initially FOS gave each HBOS account a separate reference numbers (one each for PPI and one each for harassment etc on all seven accounts). This complexity was highly confusing for all parties concerned. Later it was shortened to just one main reference number. The bank had incorrectly added PPI on all but one account, which was unwanted and missold. Later the bank had refunded some amounts of PPI. FOS was given many detailed documents from us regarding the multiple accounts in dispute. They were presented with evidence of how HBOS had breached OFT/FSA etc guidelines many times, yet they chose to ‘dismiss’ all this data and back the bank. FOS has also been informed that one HBOS account was sold to 1st Credit then closed soon afterwards. Even this did not impress FOS about the flawed nature of the accounts and they have virtually told us that the CCA has little to do with them.



Several more issues relating to some of the more obstructive FOS operatives exist, but we have come to the opinion that life is too short to start new cases on ever failure of this largely unhelpful, bank-supportive authority. All data is however saved in case ever required.



There was also an issue of a FOS worker backing a DCA against us on one of these accounts. However, we later received £50.00 compensation off the DCA proving the FOS man was in error and biased against us.

Other relevant info:

There is simply too much to include here. However, we have written back to FOS accepting the £300.00 compensation off HBOS but ‘no’ liability is admitted to this bank.


-------------



The fight continues.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

Shocking

[kilasuit]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

Shocking

Really???


Are you honestly surprised???

[GrannieP]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

For more info on problems with the FOS take a look at

Financial Ombudsman Service problems, incompetent adjudicator and ombudsman

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

[Batman]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

The whole HBOS fiasco is massive and included us telling FOS about things like the bank 'self-admittedly' losing over a dozen prime letter from us but hey ho - so what.FOS 'still' backed the bank over its appalling PPI misselling/CCA dismissal agenda. ...I could run up similar accounts about rank FOS apathy against the customer on Barclays, Citi, Littlewoods and several other complaints.

Then there is the charming case of an FOS Ombudsman ignoring/dismissing the fact that 1st Credit were chasing a HFC account (now closed)that had a truck load of PPI still to be refunded on. FOS 'still' backed the hostile DCA on this insanity!

Its all so 'bad' it's bloody well comical and you just could NOT make it up..

FOS are a joke, clearly bank-orientated against the consumer on the vast majority of cases, and frequently at odds with their own workers BUT the establishment will not deal with this sensitive issue - yet!

It cannot go on regardless though and I predict that the world press WILL have a field day with it all in due course.

[transformer999]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

Just a little info I read this morning Niddy and thought I should post up! Challenging a decision of the Financial Ombudsman Service: dare you? United Kingdom June 18 2012 Over recent years, the courts have made it clear that a very high degree of deference is to be shown to decisions made by Ombudsman services. Only last year, the High Court – in refusing an application for permission to apply for judicial review in R (Sharma) v Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman [2011] EWHC 2609 – highlighted the prevailing view of the courts that although judicial review of the Parliamentary Ombudsman is permissible, it will be a rare event. This trend resurfaced again last month in a decision concerning the Financial Ombudsman Service (“the ombudsman”). In R (Green) v The Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd [2012] EWHC 1253, the ombudsman had found that Mr Green, a financial adviser, had misled his clients, Mr and Mrs Gunner, on the risks associated with a pension drawdown scheme, a finding which Mr Justice Collins clearly accepted. In his decision, the ombudsman went a step further and concluded that the Gunners would not have entered into drawdown arrangements had they been advised properly about its risks; a conclusion Mr Green challenged. Although not expressly stated in his judgment, it is evident that Mr Justice Collins did not himself agree with the ombudsman’s conclusion on causation – namely that the Gunners would not have entered into the scheme if they had been given proper advice – noting that, “hindsight does sometimes change perceptions.” However, what Mr Justice Collins was very clear about, was that it was not a decision he was able to overturn. The test he had to consider was whether the decision was irrational in the Wednesbury sense, and it simply was not. Of future interest to Ombudsman services and those thinking of challenging their decisions was the discussion of the scope of the deference to be shown to the Financial Ombudsman, and Mr Justice Collins remarks that where a decision maker has a particular expertise and is given a wide discretion, such as the Financial Ombudsman, it will be very difficult to establish that a particular decision was irrational.

[mgfboy]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - Super Complaint

I think the whole of FOS is out of it's depth, in that it can't recruit enough people with the experience to review cases.

As far as I know they is no minimum qualifications that an adjudicator/ombudsman needs to get a job and I would be very interested in see what their internal training is like once they have one. I have to prove to the FSA that I'm competent in what I do so who does FOS have to prove it's staff competence to?????

I might apply for a job there ( but I bet I would be barred because of my credit history!!!!)

I've attached a file showing what they are looking for, it really makes you laugh!!!

[Undercover Elsa]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

She got to be Chief Ombudsman in 18 months after starting with no financial qualifications??!!

That says it all really.

[transformer999]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

Just goes to show that the FOS are an arse just like the law!!!!

[kilasuit]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

think ive found a new job seems anyone can apply

Needs no real experience at all

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Financial Ombudsman Service - SuperComplaint

Here's a challenge.

We (AAD) will sponsor someone to get a job there and whistle blow. Blow the service wide open

PM me if interested and we'll sort something out. Serious replies only please.

Let's video the whole shambles and let the world see the real FOS!!