Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

[di30]

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

...............oh yes further compo.

I have a health condition (Chronic kidney disease) and I also have high blood pressure, now stress can raise my blood pressure and worsen the kidneys, the specialist confirmed its the blood pressure is the cause of my CKD, now the fact that this complaint has not been running smoothly, and again on to another adjudicator, its been added stress.......(you get my drift) lol....

Of course this was fast tracked to the ombudsman because of my condition but the complaint has been with them since the end of 2012.

[di30]

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

........Whatabout the fact of having 3 different adjudicators, for one the time it takes for them to read through everything of our case, this has had to be done 3 times over now, not sure if this can be brought into the equation of the inconvenience, it seems to me that some of the info/letters we have previously sent them Niddy they may not have been passed to the Ombudsman in order for her to take into account, as these proved short-comings, well I think so....,lol

[Never-In-Doubt]

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

I'll try look tmw. You have time. Relax

[di30]

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

Thank you Niddy this new 3rd Adjudicator who introduced himself a few weeks back not back from his hols till tomorrow anyway, that is cool thank you.......

[di30]

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

I wonder if they will tell me if Lloyds agreed or not with the previous provisional decision?

Would the fos tell me though? Curious.com lol.........

[di30]

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

Hubby had email from the Adjudicator to say, they are asking getting in touch with Lloyds about a few points (not sure why he received this email as none of us been in touch yet) only the other week to say we will be submitting further information in regards of the other 2 accounts as things didnt add up etc).

He also said that they have received confirmation from Lloyds the other week that they received the Provisional decision, but they not yet commented.

Just thought I would update, wonder what points they mean (i dont want to email and seem pushy) lol.

Strange I did mention about if i should contact them about LLoyds comments the other day (above), maybe adjudicator been checking my posts on here lol.......

[Never-In-Doubt]

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

Here you go - sorry for the delay

Nothing more, nothing less....... (just change the adjudicators name and the reference) - remember to attach the documents promised ie; the statement confirming the account was live in Dec 2000; the letter from the complaints manager and the two letters regards the rates.

Dear Adjudicator,

Ref: xxxxxxxx

We write with reference to the Ombudsman Provisional Decision dated 23 May 2014 and we'd like to submit additional details which again, seem to be getting overlooked.

Prior to the final account upgrade to the Premier Account, whereby we argue that we held a Gold Account prior to taking the loan; well we've found the corresponding statement and this is attached for your perusal. This statement clearly shows that towards the end of the year 2000 the Gold Account was already in place and was so for over a month before we took out the loan in (January 2001). Based on common-sense logic, it's pretty obvious that a statement can only be produced a month after account inception in order to allow for processing of entries made to the account. With this in mind it'd be fair to say that upgrade from the Classic Account to Gold Account must have been at least in December 2000.

The Ombudsman has stated that they were persuaded that we had opted to upgrade to the Gold Account to benefit from the Gold Service Loan features. We do not agree because if this was the case then under what logic would we wait for well over a month after the upgrade prior to applying for the loan - that, let's not forget, was never guaranteed to be approved, when based on the provisional decision it is clear the Ombudsman believes we upgraded for the benefits of this loan, which we'd never even applied for at the time of upgrade, let alone been approved for. We agree totally that if we did indeed apply for the loan the same day that the account was upgraded then the Ombudsman may well have a point but this did not occur and thus the Ombudsman could do with reviewing things.

When we held the Classic Account we also had a loan so in January (2001) when we were offered a higher loan, with the intention of clearing the other loan with some extra funds at a lower monthly payment than the old loan, it sounded great so of course we took the new loan. We weren't told about any preferential rates and as we have explained on numerous occasions now, rates don't mean much to us - we work on a 'how much will be that be each month' rule. If it was affordable we applied, if not we didn't.

The main features packaged into the Gold Account were of no use to us plus we held already in place medical conditions which should have automatically immediately excluded us. We've never been abroad, never had a mobile phone and already had breakdown cover in place with better benefits than those offered by Lloyds, for free! It makes no sense that we'd have agreed to take this fee-paying account.

We've tried to explain this but still it gets mis-construed. We emailed the Adjudicator on 01/11/2013 a copy of our Stand-Alone Insurance cover that protected endless items, including similar cover included with the Gold Account, such as Personal Money/Cards, Locks and Keys etc. We reiterate that this cover was a specific House Contents Insurance, provided by Lloyds Insurance and was absolutely nothing to do with the Gold Account - the Home Insurance Policy was in effect long before the upgrade to Gold Account. The Adjudicator then sent us a copy of the extended warranty that was supposed to be part of the Gold Service Account, dated around December 2000. We did not receive that from the bank at the time, when the Adjudicator sent us that warranty cover it was the first we'd seen of it. However as explained above, we did already hold duplicate cover from the same company that upgraded the account, Lloyds.

In all the communication we've had to date it seems it is us that do all the running around. The bank have very little info available to back up anything yet we do. We are telling you the truth and how it actually is, yet you seem to think that everyone is savvy to money and finance - sadly that is not accurate and people do actually work on a 'can I afford it' basis based purely on the end monthly repayment figure - not an interest rate. Lloyds have been persistent in their shortcomings as they have a duty to provide us with information about our accounts and any products in a clear, fair and not misleading way that would allow us to make a decision about whether or not the account was suitable for our needs. This just didn't happen and even though the bank have very little paperwork you're basing this decision incorrectly on the bank acting as they would now, back then they did not and everything was pushed through - anything for an easy sale was how it felt from a customer's point of view. This shocking behaviour by the same bank in question was proven in the summer of 2008 we believe?

We're simplistic people with normal jobs. We don't earn much, we don't have fancy holidays or splash out - we live within our means and enjoy a humble family life. All this is extremely confusing to us and we've had to seek additional help in compiling these responses because it goes way over heads. We believed at the time of all these upgrades that all accounts charge a fee - the advisor told us this, but typical Lloyds means they'll never find the records backing this - that was a lie and we're the ones being punished. If we'd known we could have stayed a customer with the Classic Account (for no monthly fee) then too right we'd have stayed put and not let them upgrade us. It was never explained to us like that. We were actually told that we couldn't have any fee free accounts and were told that older accounts were being phased out and that ALL accounts were going to be fee charging. What were we to do? What would you have done? You trust your bank, it's been an unwritten rule for decades since banking was born! It was never explained to us by Lloyds that the charges were actually OD charges as some statements showed a fixed charge; it was actually one of the FOS Adjudicators that explained this to us in one of her emails.

Please read back through the notes to around August 2012 and you'll see a comment made by Andrew Frost from Lloyds complaints whereby he writes "These accounts have almost all been phased out and the modern account with added product benefits have replaced them". That letter also stated that we have had experience of these types of accounts with their benefits since 1996, and the page prior to that states 'this shows you have had top product in 1996 and have come full circle back to our top product in 2007' - really? That letter isn't right, think about it something is clearly amiss here! We held a Classic Account until Dec 2000 when we were upgraded to a Gold Account until around 2005 when we were upgraded to the Platinum Account before finally being upgraded to the Premier Account in 2007. Back in 1996 there was no 'Premier' or 'Top Account' and we certainly did not have access to one.

It's pretty clear we were simply flogged / mis-informed / mis-sold Lloyds products that staff were incentivised to sell and were driven to upgrade without thinking what was right for the customer. That is a very publicised fact now, so it cannot be ignored.

With respect to the Platinum account we cannot recall ever receiving any information on this packaged account; no welcome pack, nothing. Yet having retrospectively researching the benefits of this package online it became clear that we've got the same issue as the Gold Account upgrade, it may well have a packaged benefit but it was irrelevant and not suitable for our needs. We can't even remember how this came to get upgraded but it was certainly never agreed by either of us. Think about it, why would we upgrade to willingly pay more each month for the same benefits that we already had with the previous packaged account?

The Ombudsman mentions the preferential loan rates in 2005 when Lloyds had upgraded the account to the Platinum Account yet the bank could not provide these rates, and here we are arguing this with the Ombudsman when in our case this bank has acted appallingly throughout our relationship with them. Back to the rates, you have gone by rates in place not at the time in question - how can that be right, ie how can you find against me with a statement of preferential rates without knowledge of the actual preferential rate - let alone the actual normal rate? It's not a one-off either, we have attached a copy of this for your perusal with a second for the Classic Account.

We'd appreciate it if you'd ask the Ombudsman to review their provisional decision because quite plainly, it's absurd to think that the bank have acted correctly when faced with the pile of evidence we have compared to the lack of evidence the bank hold.

We'd also like to claim compensation from the FOS (if this is a separate process then please advise your complaints process about the service received) and the bank for the way we've been treated which has been a shambles from both sides from day one. The bank ought to pay a compensation amount for the pure hell they've put us through over the years by unlawfully and quite incorrectly applying all sorts of upgrades and then lying, hiding paperwork and generally behaving in a decepetive and unprofessional manner. We are considering a more serious complaint about their actions to the Financial Conduct Authority - not least because of their lack at retention of documents has made this a living hell for us both. It's almost as if they know that you'll base decisions on their past behaviour if they destroy all evidence. What's the odds, really, that the bank have no documents?

If the bank kept their records then they'd have to provide the main evidence to you, not us. We've worked almost full time on this for the best part of 3 years now and considering our illnesses this is totally unacceptable and is mainly attributed to Lloyds and their overall shortcomings.

As far as the FOS goes, how many more changes in decision, changes of case handlers, changes of adjudicators before one person actually takes ownership of what should have been an otherwise simple and straightforward reclaim of mis-sold accounts? The FOS knows full well, one of us has a health condition (Chronic kidney disease) and high blood pressure and the stress of all this caused a blood pressure raise which worsens the kidneys. It's been confirmed by the consultant that the blood-pressure issue is the cause of the now CKD. The fact that this complaint has been running on for so long, with high demands expected due to the bank's inability to provide ANY evidence has added to the stress and then when we learn it's been passed from Adjudicator to Adjudicator it not only frustrates us but it's also extremely stressful because the new Adjudicator comes along and makes more demands from us (with short deadlines) only to leave for another to come and do the same again. We've had enough - we're supposed to be on the fast-track yet we're already almost 3 years in - it'll kill us before long at this rate!

Yours sincerely,


Mr & Mrs Di30

[Never-In-Doubt]

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

Obviously as you can see it's a total rewrite of yours - but it addresses the valid points as required to get a full overturn. It seems they might gang-up but this is your last call - so it's long, but necessary - it should do the trick - if not then sadly that's it, at least you won one element and you'll get a wee bit compo (surely).....

Mines a stella

[di30]

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

ACE thank you Niddy! you have re-worded it to make lots more sense, its great and its another chance, glad you mentioned about the FCA was also thinking about mentioning this too, so glad you did haha!

Hopefully it will be more than a stella Nids lol fingers crossed, dai says a huge thank you too, we have really appreciated all your input in to this, cheers so muchly

[Never-In-Doubt]

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

well it started a refusal, now we've got 1 out of 3 so this is the last stance to get either 2 or 3 out of 3 + some compo x2

[Never-In-Doubt]

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

all edits finished - ready to go

[di30]

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

just sent it now!!! Fingers crossed and Niddy your a star, whatever happens now we shall see, but at least the way I see it now, its far better than what it was originally when they did reject it fully! Thank you so much :-)

[di30]

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

2 emails back this morning, the first one to say thank you and if they need anything further they will be in touch and the other to give details on how to complain of their service with attachment leaflet, should i still do this or wait for the final decision to come through first? lol.

Dear Mr & Mrs

Thank you for your email. I will let you know if I, or the Ombudsman, have any further queries.

Yours sincerely,

Adjudicator

.................................................. ................................


Dear Mr & Mrs

Further to my last email I have attached a leaflet with information regarding our complaints process.
The first point of call would be my manager, Lisa Lowe, who is available on 02070935702 or lisa.lowe@financial-ombudsman.org.uk. Lisa can look at the service you have received, but not at the outcome of the complaint as that is strictly down to the Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely,
Adjudicator

[Never-In-Doubt]

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

Wait for now.

[di30]

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

Okey dokey.
I know he said last week that he wrote to lloyds to ask few questions!

Am curious to know what they are? and why only now are they doing this? odd!