Tweet
Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS
Yes its late lol, but put something together. Okay its VERY lengthy, as wasnt sure to write some points first then about the compo etc, it maybe too much I dont know LOL. I can of course change it, take out non relevant info if you dont think its needed. :-)
DRAFT!!!!
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................
For the attention of The Service Manager (Name)
Complaint REF xxxxxxxxxx
We are writing to you about the disappointing service received from the Financial Ombudsman Service.
We made our complaint about Lloyds Bank PLC in August 2012, as it was rejected we raised this up with the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Firstly, we would like to show details of what happened whilst our complaint was under the team of Adjudicators (please note these are not all emails, but relevant in order to give you an idea of what we have been going through) later in this letter, it will explain why we feel we have reason to raise this up with you.
Our case was finally allocated to the "First Adjudicator (name)" on 22 May 2013, on request we sent a number of information that was relevant to our complaint, sent by many emails.
On the 10th July 2013, we received an email from (Adjudicator) she recommended not to uphold, but in order to review again for us to send further information by 24 July 2013. We sent further information in order to have our complaint reviewed.
Email received 13 August 2013, (Adjudicator) now recommends to uphold and confirmed she had written to Lloyds.
We had emailed later on to ask for any updates and further developments, ie: from Lloyds Bank.
An email received from (Adjudicator) dated 29 August 2013, Adjudicator stated she spoken to Lloyds who had explained a fault with the systems about letter she sent them, and Lloyds state it was only logged the day before (28 August 2013) so Lloyds were given extra time - for the end of that week.
31 August 2013 we raised comments about missed points and it was said that the Adjudicator was also to take matter up with Senior Colleague, this was in regards of her upheld decision made in August 2013.
We heard nothing more on her Senior Manager, so not even sure if it was actually taken up or not.
Meanwhile we emailed for updates and received an email from Adjudicator to state she in process of reviewing information and needed more time as it was complex in regards of some calculations of rates etc.
We also sent further information, as it appeared Lloyds could not provide all the information.
An opinion was made on our complaint dated 30 October 2013 sent by email - Not upheld. Hard=Copy also arrived in the post some days later.
Since them there were many other emails and information sent, and we received emails about the delays in responding to us and that the FOS had problems with the Systems 04/11/2013 and it was said emails to us kept getting blocked.
A further email 18 November 2013 about delays and hoped to review our complaint by the end of that week.
On the 21 November 2013, the decision arrived and again it was unchanged and to reject.
On that same day of 21 November 2013, we emailed to confirm that we did not agree with the decision and to have our complaint passed to the Ombudsman, we also requested for fast track due to illness conditions, one of those can be life threatening if not kept in control, Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) which is a progressing disease and high blood pressure. Being under hospital specialist for this chronic illness, blood pressure has to be in control, any stress can cause a raise in blood pressure and highly possible further damage to the kidneys, unfortunately, it is the blood pressure that caused the kidney disease. We also have an Autistic son with special needs that require a lot of our time and attention, all this was disclosed to the Adjudicator.
We were informed that under exceptional serious circumstances, illness and/or hardship are taken into account to be eligible for fast tracking and that our individual case will be discussed with a Senior Manager.
On the 22 November we received an email to confirm they will fast track due to our circumstances and again on the 13 December 2013 informed that our complaint was agreed for fast track for a number of reasons.
We were informed that our file will be passed to the Ombudsman by the 18 December 2013 and also to forward any further information by that time, but as this did not happen for that date we queried this on 6 Jan 2014, the Adjudicator said she will make Ombudsman aware that our complaint was to be treated as priority, and later that day it was confirmed our file was finally passed on (5 Jan 2014).
8 February 2014, a response to our email to ask for an approximate timescale, but was informed it will inevitable take a bit of time.
21 February 2014, Update of our complaint, Ombudsman requested for information from Lloyds and Adjudicator Ms Fiona Jarrold confirmed she leaving business and our complaint was passed on to her colleague Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown.
Since this changeover, there were many emails, and further information submitted and again further delays.
We raised some concerns on email dated 15 April 2014 to Adjudicator Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown, this was also due to more missed points on received emails from previous weeks, we said that we are going round in circles and also of the discomfort of lack of diligence in picking up the main crux of our complaint.
We received on 17 April 2014 in response to our email to explain it understood this is a difficult situation for us, and the amount of information, time and our effort we put into it.
With that they were fully aware by then how stressful this was for us!
We also indicated that we are considering putting in a complaint about the service of our complaint and in response to this, the Adjudicator said to let him know if we require the details to make this complaint.
On the 25 April 2014 we received an email to confirm the Ombudsman will be reviewing our complaint, as prior to this we had sent them yet more further information.
They could not provide any timescale but then on the 23 May 2014 we received the Provisional decision by email, it was "upheld in part" but no further award of compensation for distress/inconvenience/delays etc was awarded.
However, it was also confirmed that now this Adjudicator Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown was leaving the business that day, and our complaint was being passed to his colleague Mr Alex Chruscikowski. Please note and take into account this is the "3rd Adjudicator" and if we could send in further submissions for a final decision by the 24 June 2014.
We had done this by sending in further information, as it was clear as stated on a comment made by the Ombudsman on the provisional decision that Lloyds could not provide the relevant information, and we also sent a letter/email for the final submission, we made it clear of the way our complaint had been dealt with throughout and requested for compensation for the distress/inconvenience it caused us, but on the 26 June 2014, the Final decision was unchanged to still "uphold in part" and no award of compensation for the above stated reasons.
It appears that the Ombudsman didn't think it would be appropriate in the circumstances of the complaint, she states our frustration but nothing at all about our health matters which surely she should have been clearly aware of this (reasons for fast track).
We have been affected in all ways, firstly it does not help that fact there are already serious health conditions, stress or delays does not help. Its caused pain and suffering.
It's been like a game of pass the parcel where there was no full ownership to just one Adjudicator changing staff, information after information was submitted as requested, yet very essential information was missed and not taken into account, what we did provide felt it was used against us and it concerns us that it seemed to be just one sided and not impartial, considering lack of information provided by the bank, yet they used just basic non concrete information from the bank as a back up for them to make it seem we made ours up, despite sending in a huge amount of paperwork, this was also confirmed of us doing this and our efforts by Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown on one of his emails above.
This is shocking behaviour and like a roller-coaster ride, it just went downhill, we do not feel we have had fair treatment, it feels more like torture, we have enough of that treatment already from these banks.
We hope you can also refer to the final letter used during submissions for the final decision, as you will see in more details and previous emails too.
We hope this can be looked into, as we feel it is essential to have this put right. We look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Yes its late lol, but put something together. Okay its VERY lengthy, as wasnt sure to write some points first then about the compo etc, it maybe too much I dont know LOL. I can of course change it, take out non relevant info if you dont think its needed. :-)
DRAFT!!!!
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................
For the attention of The Service Manager (Name)
Complaint REF xxxxxxxxxx
We are writing to you about the disappointing service received from the Financial Ombudsman Service.
We made our complaint about Lloyds Bank PLC in August 2012, as it was rejected we raised this up with the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Firstly, we would like to show details of what happened whilst our complaint was under the team of Adjudicators (please note these are not all emails, but relevant in order to give you an idea of what we have been going through) later in this letter, it will explain why we feel we have reason to raise this up with you.
Our case was finally allocated to the "First Adjudicator (name)" on 22 May 2013, on request we sent a number of information that was relevant to our complaint, sent by many emails.
On the 10th July 2013, we received an email from (Adjudicator) she recommended not to uphold, but in order to review again for us to send further information by 24 July 2013. We sent further information in order to have our complaint reviewed.
Email received 13 August 2013, (Adjudicator) now recommends to uphold and confirmed she had written to Lloyds.
We had emailed later on to ask for any updates and further developments, ie: from Lloyds Bank.
An email received from (Adjudicator) dated 29 August 2013, Adjudicator stated she spoken to Lloyds who had explained a fault with the systems about letter she sent them, and Lloyds state it was only logged the day before (28 August 2013) so Lloyds were given extra time - for the end of that week.
31 August 2013 we raised comments about missed points and it was said that the Adjudicator was also to take matter up with Senior Colleague, this was in regards of her upheld decision made in August 2013.
We heard nothing more on her Senior Manager, so not even sure if it was actually taken up or not.
Meanwhile we emailed for updates and received an email from Adjudicator to state she in process of reviewing information and needed more time as it was complex in regards of some calculations of rates etc.
We also sent further information, as it appeared Lloyds could not provide all the information.
An opinion was made on our complaint dated 30 October 2013 sent by email - Not upheld. Hard=Copy also arrived in the post some days later.
Since them there were many other emails and information sent, and we received emails about the delays in responding to us and that the FOS had problems with the Systems 04/11/2013 and it was said emails to us kept getting blocked.
A further email 18 November 2013 about delays and hoped to review our complaint by the end of that week.
On the 21 November 2013, the decision arrived and again it was unchanged and to reject.
On that same day of 21 November 2013, we emailed to confirm that we did not agree with the decision and to have our complaint passed to the Ombudsman, we also requested for fast track due to illness conditions, one of those can be life threatening if not kept in control, Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) which is a progressing disease and high blood pressure. Being under hospital specialist for this chronic illness, blood pressure has to be in control, any stress can cause a raise in blood pressure and highly possible further damage to the kidneys, unfortunately, it is the blood pressure that caused the kidney disease. We also have an Autistic son with special needs that require a lot of our time and attention, all this was disclosed to the Adjudicator.
We were informed that under exceptional serious circumstances, illness and/or hardship are taken into account to be eligible for fast tracking and that our individual case will be discussed with a Senior Manager.
On the 22 November we received an email to confirm they will fast track due to our circumstances and again on the 13 December 2013 informed that our complaint was agreed for fast track for a number of reasons.
We were informed that our file will be passed to the Ombudsman by the 18 December 2013 and also to forward any further information by that time, but as this did not happen for that date we queried this on 6 Jan 2014, the Adjudicator said she will make Ombudsman aware that our complaint was to be treated as priority, and later that day it was confirmed our file was finally passed on (5 Jan 2014).
8 February 2014, a response to our email to ask for an approximate timescale, but was informed it will inevitable take a bit of time.
21 February 2014, Update of our complaint, Ombudsman requested for information from Lloyds and Adjudicator Ms Fiona Jarrold confirmed she leaving business and our complaint was passed on to her colleague Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown.
Since this changeover, there were many emails, and further information submitted and again further delays.
We raised some concerns on email dated 15 April 2014 to Adjudicator Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown, this was also due to more missed points on received emails from previous weeks, we said that we are going round in circles and also of the discomfort of lack of diligence in picking up the main crux of our complaint.
We received on 17 April 2014 in response to our email to explain it understood this is a difficult situation for us, and the amount of information, time and our effort we put into it.
With that they were fully aware by then how stressful this was for us!
We also indicated that we are considering putting in a complaint about the service of our complaint and in response to this, the Adjudicator said to let him know if we require the details to make this complaint.
On the 25 April 2014 we received an email to confirm the Ombudsman will be reviewing our complaint, as prior to this we had sent them yet more further information.
They could not provide any timescale but then on the 23 May 2014 we received the Provisional decision by email, it was "upheld in part" but no further award of compensation for distress/inconvenience/delays etc was awarded.
However, it was also confirmed that now this Adjudicator Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown was leaving the business that day, and our complaint was being passed to his colleague Mr Alex Chruscikowski. Please note and take into account this is the "3rd Adjudicator" and if we could send in further submissions for a final decision by the 24 June 2014.
We had done this by sending in further information, as it was clear as stated on a comment made by the Ombudsman on the provisional decision that Lloyds could not provide the relevant information, and we also sent a letter/email for the final submission, we made it clear of the way our complaint had been dealt with throughout and requested for compensation for the distress/inconvenience it caused us, but on the 26 June 2014, the Final decision was unchanged to still "uphold in part" and no award of compensation for the above stated reasons.
It appears that the Ombudsman didn't think it would be appropriate in the circumstances of the complaint, she states our frustration but nothing at all about our health matters which surely she should have been clearly aware of this (reasons for fast track).
We have been affected in all ways, firstly it does not help that fact there are already serious health conditions, stress or delays does not help. Its caused pain and suffering.
It's been like a game of pass the parcel where there was no full ownership to just one Adjudicator changing staff, information after information was submitted as requested, yet very essential information was missed and not taken into account, what we did provide felt it was used against us and it concerns us that it seemed to be just one sided and not impartial, considering lack of information provided by the bank, yet they used just basic non concrete information from the bank as a back up for them to make it seem we made ours up, despite sending in a huge amount of paperwork, this was also confirmed of us doing this and our efforts by Mr Jonas Carboo-Brown on one of his emails above.
This is shocking behaviour and like a roller-coaster ride, it just went downhill, we do not feel we have had fair treatment, it feels more like torture, we have enough of that treatment already from these banks.
We hope you can also refer to the final letter used during submissions for the final decision, as you will see in more details and previous emails too.
We hope this can be looked into, as we feel it is essential to have this put right. We look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
it will all be worth it in the end lol.....
Comment