Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Ok you need to type up a letter and we'll go from there

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Thank you Niddy

Just received an email from the Adjudicator now about what happens now with the Ombudsman with a Consumer Sheet. (Our complaint have been dealt with by email method from start to finish, which is why a lot of emails lol, "No hardcopy post".

We have until the 18 December, so will get cracking on a letter today (will send you a copy) and go from there once done, thank you.

Dear Mr and Mrs

I sent you my view of your complaint on 21 November 2013.

an ombudsman will review your complaint

Because you did not agree, an ombudsman will review your complaint and make a final decision. If the ombudsman’s conclusions are different to mine, they will explain why and let you reply before they give you their decision.

We should already have all the information the ombudsman needs to reach a decision. But if we need anything more from you, we will let you know.

what you need to do now

If you have any further points or information you want the ombudsman to consider, please send these to me by 18 December 2013.

If you need more time to reply, please let me know before this date. If I do not hear from you, I will assume you do not want to add anything.

We will keep you up to date with our progress – but please get in touch if you have any questions in the meantime.


Yours sincerely


Adjudicator
Financial Ombudsman

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Hopefully I will finish it by tomorrow Niddy, then send to you, by "webmaster"?? cheers.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Hi Di

See below, do NOT edit it or do anything else other than add your address and the reference number (and type your name at the end). Then email it to the adjudicator with a cover email as follows;

Dear Ms Jarrold,

Complaint Ref: XXXXXXXX

We write with reference to our previous correspondence and attach a copy of a letter that we’d like adding to our complaint and sending to the Ombudsman with our case-file so they can see an overview of things, from our point of view.

We look forward to your confirmation of the above, and the Ombudsman’s preliminary decision.

Mr & Mrs Di30

That’s it – then when you get a reply let me know BEFORE doing anything. If they phone, say you’re busy and to email you.

Good luck


Letter to send (I've emailed you a copy on Word):

Your Name
Your Address 1
Your Address 2
Your Town / City
Your Post Code

29 November 2013

Dear Financial Ombudsman,

Complaint Ref:

We received the Adjudicator, Fiona Jarrold’s final decision, dated 21 November 2013, and would like to take this opportunity to put matters right, and explain the nature of our complaint in better detail. We feel that the information we provided has various points & facts that have been missed and even overlooked.

Firstly, we made the complaint to Lloyds in August 2012, as it came to our attention that we had a case in regards of being sold Packaged Accounts. We came across articles in the media and penalty groups and never realised until then that we did not have to have an upgraded packaged account and could have the option of a fee free account or even stay as we were; as we eventually paid monthly charges on the Classic account which appears to be service charges.

The products and their associated costs and benefits were never explained to us nor were we ever told about how the account features worked, nor were we given any Key Facts or even assessed to see if the product was suitable for us. If this did occur, as suggested by the Adjudicator, then certainly we’d have told the bank that we did not have any mobile phones (it was approximately 2005/06) before we purchased our first "pay as you go” mobile phone). We do not go abroad and do not hold valid Passports; hence the travel insurance would have been pointless as would the medical exclusions because we both had pre-medical conditions when the account was upgraded. We also held Breakdown Cover so that too would have been pointless.

If none of the products were suitable to us, why would we agree to pay a monthly fee?

Yes, we did receive a Welcome Package some several months later, after Lloyds upgraded our account to Gold Service. The Gold Service Account was upgraded approximately October/November of 2000 by Lloyds as we were informed that any bank account we held would in future carry a monthly charge and that it would be more beneficial for us to have a Gold Service Account because it was standard practice to upgrade. (We believe we failed to confirm to the Adjudicator that the Pack arrived several months later in the post). At no point were the benefits of this account explained to us – as explained above, if they had been we’d have told the bank that nothing was suitable for us.

We do not agree with the Adjudicator that we chose to upgrade the account as we were informed by the bank that it was standard procedure and that all accounts were subject to a monthly charge.

There seems to be some insinuation that we were aware of the costs incurred as a result of these packaged accounts. I would like to clarify that we were never informed of the costs or even what the account entailed. We were only aware of the monthly cost afterwards, because it was shown on the monthly bank statements that they were debiting an “Account Charge” which we actually presumed was the same as a Service Charge like a Classic Account despite Lloyds upgrading the account off their own backs – we did not request the upgrade and Lloyds cannot provide ANY evidence to the contrary, because none exists. They did this, not us. Coincidentally, and to clarify my point, you’ll notice that the Account Charge was the same amount as the Service Charge that came with the Classic Account (The Classic Account had no benefits attached to it).

We do not agree that we chose to accept the Gold Account for preferential rates for loans because it’s clear that we had, over the course of our relationship, several loans from Lloyds and an APR was never an issue for us; we needed the money so no matter the APR we’d have taken the loan – does this sound like the actions of someone willing to throw away money on an unnecessary charge every month? You’ll also see that we held loans at the time we held a Classic Account all the way through to the Premier Accounts but no loans were taken at the time of any upgrade. Surely if this was our intention we’d have applied for the loan at the time of the upgrade(s)?

We thought we had to pay an Account Fee no matter what bank account we ended up with, after all you tend to trust your bank, don’t you? I had no reason to suspect they were being underhand mis-selling me worthless products.

Interestingly, in August 2013 the Adjudicator did come to the opinion that our complaint should be upheld due to believing that we had to have a fee paying account. This was primarily as a direct result of providing ample evidence that clearly persuaded her that we were under the impression that we had to pay a fee for any of the Lloyds TSB Accounts that we held and she then contacted Lloyds to explain her decision but for some reason, when Lloyds disagreed by citing we benefitted from preferential overdraft fees, the Adjudicator changed her mind and suddenly found in favour of Lloyds. How can this be right when the evidence and my added explanation above, suggests anything but? Granted, there may well have been a slight reduction in the overdraft fee but that doesn’t mean we are lying or that we knew we’d maybe save a few pounds by spending a few hundred, does it? It’s absurd to suggest this based on one comment from Lloyds, disregarding all the valid points and expulsions to the associated benefit of the packaged account. If it matters that much why not calculate the amount allegedly saved on the overdraft fees charged versus the amount of the account fee and interest. This will still generate a refund, as the monthly account fee that was being charged far exceeds any potential saving on the overdraft we had. However, as a result of the mis-sale I would hope that you rule that the bank forfeit this right to change the overdraft rate based on the fact they did unlawfully upgrade my account(s) to a fee charging one without explaining the benefits of the account or offering me a free account of some sort. In hindsight of course they were chasing some form of commission but at my expense? That’s not right, it’s downright disgusting.

The Adjudicator requested additional information and I readily sent in some old loan agreements that I had. It’s worth noting that Lloyds never mentioned anything about any preferential loan rates, however the Adjudicator came to some conclusion that implied we benefitted from preferential rates on the loans we took out which is absolutely ridiculous. In theory she has found in our favour but then Lloyds don’t like that so she comes back to us asking for info which once provided, is used against us. More worryingly is the fact that the loans were never taken out at the same time as any of the account upgrades and neither were there any notes that suggest it was a preferential rate based on the current account nor is there any acceptance to admit that the loans were taken out at the time when Lloyds created a special offer. As explained, none of the loans were ever started at the time of account upgrade and you also have to consider that we cannot predict when we’ll need a loan so why would we risk paying a monthly charge just in case we ever needed a loan? It’s an expensive theory and one that never crossed our minds as at the time the bank upgraded our bank account, we did not require a loan so that would not have sold the benefits to us either (bearing in mind the already mentioned illegible products).

We were also informed by the Adjudicator that Lloyds sent limited information, so the decision was made on the information that was available at the time, which was my own information – totally misread by the Adjudicator, in our opinion. I do appreciate the Adjudicator needs to make a decision based on the available information but just reading the reasons above more than explain our predicament here – we were illegible for most the account features and regardless of any potential preferential rate, the account fee would always equate to more than any saving on the overdraft or loan.

The Adjudicator emailed us with a copy of a benefit that was supposed to have been included within the Gold Service and asked us if we know anything about this and the extended warranty offer. We confirmed that we did not recognise it, nor do we recall ever receiving that information as there were no details enclosed within the welcome pack (However the Welcome Pack the Adjudicator emailed us a copy of, was not the same Gold Welcome pack that we did in fact receive). We made it clear that we had separate cover in place already but did not provide the details until we recently came across them, we found details of our Home Insurance held with Lloyds (taken out whilst using a Classic Account) which offered additional cover at no cost (an extended warranty) so this benefit was applied before the bank upgraded our accounts and we continued home insurance with Lloyds until 2003.

The adjudicator stated that she was provided with evidence from us that confirms we had a stand alone extended warranty cover in 1998, and that the evidence Lloyds provided (Welcome pack) suggest that extended warranty cover was a benefit of the Gold Service Account in 2001 and when our account was upgraded she notes that the evidence we provided does not show that we had extended warranty cover at that time. This is because we provided the details of what we did find, when we found it - but as already stated the same stand alone insurance was continuous with extended warranty with Lloyds TSB until 2003. If we had known about this extended warranty in the Welcome Pack that the Adjudicator emailed to us or part of that pack that was supposed to have been part of the package in 2001, and if informed by the bank, then we would not have wanted to have another that was chargeable, who would? This again proves that this or any of these account features or products or costs were discussed with us when the bank upgraded the account which happened quite regularly. It appears that our personal circumstances at the time have not been taken into consideration, certainly not the facts of the complaint of why we made the complaint in the first place.

It also states in the Adjudicators opinion that she is not persuaded that we would have done anything differently had all the requirements be met. We disagree, if we were informed that we could have a choice of a fee free bank account then we’d have bitten the banks hand off. Lets not forget that the bank were the ones who upgraded the accounts, not us. They did this from Classic all the way up to the Premier Account. It say’s it all when there is no signed agreements for these upgrades, the bank will not have any because there aren’t any. We never asked to upgrade – never.

We would like you to reconsider our complaint taking into account the additional explanation above, in case the original complaint missed the key points. We are both severely unwell and really want to put this matter to bed but feel our points are being totally missed.

If you have any questions please reply to this email and we’ll get back to you usually within a few hours.

Yours faithfully,


Mr & Mrs Di30

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Hi Di

See below, do NOT edit it or do anything else other than add your address and the reference number (and type your name at the end). Then email it to the adjudicator with a cover email as follows;

Dear Ms Jarrold,

Complaint Ref: XXXXXXXX

We write with reference to our previous correspondence and attach a copy of a letter that we’d like adding to our complaint and sending to the Ombudsman with our case-file so they can see an overview of things, from our point of view.

We look forward to your confirmation of the above, and the Ombudsman’s preliminary decision.

Mr & Mrs Di30

That’s it – then when you get a reply let me know BEFORE doing anything. If they phone, say you’re busy and to email you.

Good luck


Letter to send (I've emailed you a copy on Word):

Your Name
Your Address 1
Your Address 2
Your Town / City
Your Post Code

29 November 2013

Dear Financial Ombudsman,

Complaint Ref:

We received the Adjudicator, Fiona Jarrold’s final decision, dated 21 November 2013, and would like to take this opportunity to put matters right, and explain the nature of our complaint in better detail. We feel that the information we provided has various points & facts that have been missed and even overlooked.

Firstly, we made the complaint to Lloyds in August 2012, as it came to our attention that we had a case in regards of being sold Packaged Accounts. We came across articles in the media and penalty groups and never realised until then that we did not have to have an upgraded packaged account and could have the option of a fee free account or even stay as we were; as we eventually paid monthly charges on the Classic account which appears to be service charges.

The products and their associated costs and benefits were never explained to us nor were we ever told about how the account features worked, nor were we given any Key Facts or even assessed to see if the product was suitable for us. If this did occur, as suggested by the Adjudicator, then certainly we’d have told the bank that we did not have any mobile phones (it was approximately 2005/06) before we purchased our first "pay as you go” mobile phone). We do not go abroad and do not hold valid Passports; hence the travel insurance would have been pointless as would the medical exclusions because we both had pre-medical conditions when the account was upgraded. We also held Breakdown Cover so that too would have been pointless.

If none of the products were suitable to us, why would we agree to pay a monthly fee?

Yes, we did receive a Welcome Package some several months later, after Lloyds upgraded our account to Gold Service. The Gold Service Account was upgraded approximately October/November of 2000 by Lloyds as we were informed that any bank account we held would in future carry a monthly charge and that it would be more beneficial for us to have a Gold Service Account because it was standard practice to upgrade. (We believe we failed to confirm to the Adjudicator that the Pack arrived several months later in the post). At no point were the benefits of this account explained to us – as explained above, if they had been we’d have told the bank that nothing was suitable for us.

We do not agree with the Adjudicator that we chose to upgrade the account as we were informed by the bank that it was standard procedure and that all accounts were subject to a monthly charge.

There seems to be some insinuation that we were aware of the costs incurred as a result of these packaged accounts. I would like to clarify that we were never informed of the costs or even what the account entailed. We were only aware of the monthly cost afterwards, because it was shown on the monthly bank statements that they were debiting an “Account Charge” which we actually presumed was the same as a Service Charge like a Classic Account despite Lloyds upgrading the account off their own backs – we did not request the upgrade and Lloyds cannot provide ANY evidence to the contrary, because none exists. They did this, not us. Coincidentally, and to clarify my point, you’ll notice that the Account Charge was the same amount as the Service Charge that came with the Classic Account (The Classic Account had no benefits attached to it).

We do not agree that we chose to accept the Gold Account for preferential rates for loans because it’s clear that we had, over the course of our relationship, several loans from Lloyds and an APR was never an issue for us; we needed the money so no matter the APR we’d have taken the loan – does this sound like the actions of someone willing to throw away money on an unnecessary charge every month? You’ll also see that we held loans at the time we held a Classic Account all the way through to the Premier Accounts but no loans were taken at the time of any upgrade. Surely if this was our intention we’d have applied for the loan at the time of the upgrade(s)?

We thought we had to pay an Account Fee no matter what bank account we ended up with, after all you tend to trust your bank, don’t you? I had no reason to suspect they were being underhand mis-selling me worthless products.

Interestingly, in August 2013 the Adjudicator did come to the opinion that our complaint should be upheld due to believing that we had to have a fee paying account. This was primarily as a direct result of providing ample evidence that clearly persuaded her that we were under the impression that we had to pay a fee for any of the Lloyds TSB Accounts that we held and she then contacted Lloyds to explain her decision but for some reason, when Lloyds disagreed by citing we benefitted from preferential overdraft fees, the Adjudicator changed her mind and suddenly found in favour of Lloyds. How can this be right when the evidence and my added explanation above, suggests anything but? Granted, there may well have been a slight reduction in the overdraft fee but that doesn’t mean we are lying or that we knew we’d maybe save a few pounds by spending a few hundred, does it? It’s absurd to suggest this based on one comment from Lloyds, disregarding all the valid points and expulsions to the associated benefit of the packaged account. If it matters that much why not calculate the amount allegedly saved on the overdraft fees charged versus the amount of the account fee and interest. This will still generate a refund, as the monthly account fee that was being charged far exceeds any potential saving on the overdraft we had. However, as a result of the mis-sale I would hope that you rule that the bank forfeit this right to change the overdraft rate based on the fact they did unlawfully upgrade my account(s) to a fee charging one without explaining the benefits of the account or offering me a free account of some sort. In hindsight of course they were chasing some form of commission but at my expense? That’s not right, it’s downright disgusting.

The Adjudicator requested additional information and I readily sent in some old loan agreements that I had. It’s worth noting that Lloyds never mentioned anything about any preferential loan rates, however the Adjudicator came to some conclusion that implied we benefitted from preferential rates on the loans we took out which is absolutely ridiculous. In theory she has found in our favour but then Lloyds don’t like that so she comes back to us asking for info which once provided, is used against us. More worryingly is the fact that the loans were never taken out at the same time as any of the account upgrades and neither were there any notes that suggest it was a preferential rate based on the current account nor is there any acceptance to admit that the loans were taken out at the time when Lloyds created a special offer. As explained, none of the loans were ever started at the time of account upgrade and you also have to consider that we cannot predict when we’ll need a loan so why would we risk paying a monthly charge just in case we ever needed a loan? It’s an expensive theory and one that never crossed our minds as at the time the bank upgraded our bank account, we did not require a loan so that would not have sold the benefits to us either (bearing in mind the already mentioned illegible products).

We were also informed by the Adjudicator that Lloyds sent limited information, so the decision was made on the information that was available at the time, which was my own information – totally misread by the Adjudicator, in our opinion. I do appreciate the Adjudicator needs to make a decision based on the available information but just reading the reasons above more than explain our predicament here – we were illegible for most the account features and regardless of any potential preferential rate, the account fee would always equate to more than any saving on the overdraft or loan.

The Adjudicator emailed us with a copy of a benefit that was supposed to have been included within the Gold Service and asked us if we know anything about this and the extended warranty offer. We confirmed that we did not recognise it, nor do we recall ever receiving that information as there were no details enclosed within the welcome pack (However the Welcome Pack the Adjudicator emailed us a copy of, was not the same Gold Welcome pack that we did in fact receive). We made it clear that we had separate cover in place already but did not provide the details until we recently came across them, we found details of our Home Insurance held with Lloyds (taken out whilst using a Classic Account) which offered additional cover at no cost (an extended warranty) so this benefit was applied before the bank upgraded our accounts and we continued home insurance with Lloyds until 2003.

The adjudicator stated that she was provided with evidence from us that confirms we had a stand alone extended warranty cover in 1998, and that the evidence Lloyds provided (Welcome pack) suggest that extended warranty cover was a benefit of the Gold Service Account in 2001 and when our account was upgraded she notes that the evidence we provided does not show that we had extended warranty cover at that time. This is because we provided the details of what we did find, when we found it - but as already stated the same stand alone insurance was continuous with extended warranty with Lloyds TSB until 2003. If we had known about this extended warranty in the Welcome Pack that the Adjudicator emailed to us or part of that pack that was supposed to have been part of the package in 2001, and if informed by the bank, then we would not have wanted to have another that was chargeable, who would? This again proves that this or any of these account features or products or costs were discussed with us when the bank upgraded the account which happened quite regularly. It appears that our personal circumstances at the time have not been taken into consideration, certainly not the facts of the complaint of why we made the complaint in the first place.

It also states in the Adjudicators opinion that she is not persuaded that we would have done anything differently had all the requirements be met. We disagree, if we were informed that we could have a choice of a fee free bank account then we’d have bitten the banks hand off. Lets not forget that the bank were the ones who upgraded the accounts, not us. They did this from Classic all the way up to the Premier Account. It say’s it all when there is no signed agreements for these upgrades, the bank will not have any because there aren’t any. We never asked to upgrade – never.

We would like you to reconsider our complaint taking into account the additional explanation above, in case the original complaint missed the key points. We are both severely unwell and really want to put this matter to bed but feel our points are being totally missed.

If you have any questions please reply to this email and we’ll get back to you usually within a few hours.

Yours faithfully,


Mr & Mrs Di30

Missed this here Niddy, but thanks for letting me know otherwise anyway and both me and Dai appreciate all your help.
We have emailed it through, so hopefully she will get back to confirm tomorrow (Monday). Fingers crossed and a BIG THANKS

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Niddy, this was in hubby's email box, it was sent to us not long after we sent the letter, I thought I posted it but it doesnt look like I have lol, anyway, it was basically just to say that the case will be forwarded our complaint on the 18th of this month, but cannot give a timescale, we were told before that that we were accepted for fast track due to my illness thingie, so going by the time they are passing it on it does look like it is fast tracked but then it says at the bottom that the ombudsman may be dealing with cases with illness etc, surely that is the same as me with the fast tracking isnt it?

Her email here (sorry for not posting it earlier).

Dear Mr and Mrs

The deadline I have given for both parties to provide further information in relation to your complaint is 18 December. The complaint will be passed to an ombudsman on this date. However, I am unable to give you a time frame for how long it will take for the final decision to be issued as this will depend on a number of factors – such as the individual ombudsman’s caseload, whether any more information is needed on the case and whether s/he is passed any other priority cases in the meantime (where the consumers are terminally ill or suffering from financial hardship).

We will look to update you on our progress regularly and you can contact me if you have any questions or concerns.


Yours sincerely


Adjudicator
Financial Ombudsman Service

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I do hope my Adjudicator did pass that letter on. I dont suppose there is any way of knowing?
(Can we trust them to do so)? lol

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

She's bound by the FOS principles to pass it on. Chill and await a reply.

If you're asked for info don't give anything or say anything till you've spoken to me first. This time you need to be careful as it is last chance saloon for your reclaim.

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

She's bound by the FOS principles to pass it on. Chill and await a reply.

If you're asked for info don't give anything or say anything till you've spoken to me first. This time you need to be careful as it is last chance saloon for your reclaim.

Yep thanks Niddy, your a star, I daren't send anything know until I spoken to you first lol, cheers

[nattie]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Di, with regards to timescales, my brother's credit card claim ended with an adjudicator 6 months later so it might be a wait but I hope that you succeed.

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Di, with regards to timescales, my brother's credit card claim ended with an adjudicator 6 months later so it might be a wait but I hope that you succeed.

Thanks Nattie

Its already been with an Adjudicator, and its been agreed to have it fast tracked, so see what happens now, thanks though and didnt your bro win? (Think you said before he did).

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

......oh so just awaiting the Ombudsman decision now, as far as I am aware it was passed to him or her (omnbudsman) on the 18th Dec x

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Received an email from the adjudicator to say she requested statements from lloyds as some years were missing (I assumed they had all these from me), why is it only now then they are asking for these I wonder?? Hopefully it means there's hope lol.

Anyway, here it is........

Dear Mr and Mrs

I hope you had a lovely Christmas and New Year.

I have requested copies of all your bank statements from Lloyds as having reviewed the file again it appears a few years were missing. I hope to receive this either by the end of this week of by the beginning of next. Once I have this information I will pass the file to the ombudsman who has agreed to treat your complaint as a priority.

We tend to update consumers once every two months when their complaint is with an ombudsman – but if you would like more regular updates please let me know and I will arrange this.

Yours sincerely


Adjudicator

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Why didn't the adjudicator realise before about those missing years of statements when she was dealing with it?
As she says whilst reviewing our file it appears the statements are missing, so my guess is that the Ombudsman may have asked these as it was due to be moved to them sometime around the 18th Dec (last month).

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I'll sort you a reply shortly.....