Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'ombudsman'.
-
Hello All I made this SAR request to the Energy Ombudsman (E-O) as I wanted to see what Npower submitted to them as evidence to back up their response to my complaint with them. Npower are reknowned for saying they have done everything correctly but not substantiating anything with hard evidence. My questions are: 1) There are some emails between Npower and the E-O where the NPower's persons details (name number email etc) have been redacted. Is this permitted? Why? 2) The E-O hasn't sent me any evidence from Npower to substantiate their response to my complaint (but they did include the emails I sent them as evidence) . Should they withhold this from me in SAR request? As this was the purpose of me making the request in the first place. 3) Can I do anything about the above to get the info I was after in the first place? Many thanks in advance Jimbo -
Hello and happy new year! I have recently noticed from my bank statements that in 2011, a deposit for a flat was never paid back. It was £400 holding deposit, £50+VAT admin fee and the rest and £87+VAT referencing. The contract I have on email states non-refundable if the letting is 'frustrated', and defines that as, if credit info is withheld from the application OR if I cancel the letting. The agent actually cancelled the letting, and no referencing was carried out because I checked with the referencing agency. So I did not 'frustrate' anything and never moved in. Yet all the money was kept. I was planning on writing a letter before action for the full amount of £565(approx) plus 8% interest from 2011, and giving 2 weeks/10 working days to repay. (I went to the Property Ombudsman website and if I go through them the process looks to be much longer and more complicated). So hopefully this can all be resolved in a couple of weeks. Is this the best course of action? Thank you for reading! -
I took out a Unsecured Personal Loan with Halifax online in December 2011. I was NEVER asked questions like, can you afford the payments, are you employed/unemployed, and I certainly was not asked about my income. This have got so bad I am currently on an IVA - Halifax increased the IVA from 5 years to 6 years forcing me to pay for longer. I am now wondering if bankruptcy is the best option. Do I have a claim that Halifax lent to me irresponsibly without going through my finances first? -
So i'm having a bit of a dispute with our house insurance, long story short, my husband didn't close the shower screen properly and left the bathroom with shower running for a period of time, I walked into my kitchen to find it had all collected into a bubble and burst through a hole in the ceiling causing damage to the walls, floor and plaster. Insurance told us we could claim through our escape of water and had to give them two itemized insurance quotes. We massively struggled to get these quotes with several traders not turning up or wanting to charge a fee to produce them, we asked if the insurance company could send out someone to quote and fix - they said no, we asked for a list of their preferred suppliers and was told they didn't have one. Eventually they told us they would send a loss adjuster out with a view to offer a cash settlement. Whilst waiting for the loss adjuster we had another leak when using the shower and it became apparent that the bath was coming away from the wall when we were using it causing the seal to break and the water to escape down the side, this was confirmed when we got a plumber out through our boiler cover insurance. So we resealed the bath but again the bath would move so in order to prevent more damage whilst waiting for the loss adjuster we stopped using the shower and stuck to baths only. We're still having to do this months later. The loss adjuster came, had no details of our claim as his system had crashed, he spent 5 minutes in the kitchen looking at the hole went into the bathroom, didn't ask us to remove the bath panel or look under the bath. He took some photos and left. We were then offered a settlement of just over £600 out of which a £250 escape of water excess was to be deducted. None of the works included in his scheduled involved fixing the issue with the bath. So we queried it. They've taken our query as a complaint and issued us with a final response claiming the loss adjuster took photos of the toilet which he claims was the root of the leak and we were negligent in fixing it hence as it must have been leaking a lengthy period as evidence by rust on the pipes (our pipes are all plastic so zero rust and 100% never been a leak) so they are refusing to pay out for any bathroom works. We've subsequently had 3 different plumbers out to the house for quote all which have been in the region of around £1700 and all the works listed are the same, all state that no evidence of a leak to the toilet and that significant removal and refitting of the bathroom suite and wet-wall will be needed to remedy the bath issue and the joist which has been soaked along with the fixing of the ceiling and flooring. The insurance company won't entertain these quotes or letters of evidence nor will the entertain the photos i've taken myself of the damage in particular behind the toilet which clearly shows plastic pipes and no rust anywhere there or under the bath. They've refused to let us see the report written by the loss adjuster or the photos taken and refuse to comment on how he could accurately know the issue when he didn't even look under the bath. They wont enter into a dialogue with us and have told us as they issued their final response we have to take it to the ombudsman if im not happy. Does anyone have any experience of this or words of advice on how to approach it with the ombudsman? what more evidence should I need or be gathering in order to support my complaint? I'm quite sure the insurance company are taking the **** in their offer but i've never had to make an insurance claim before so i'm not sure if this is normal or if i'm expecting too much? -
3053548.thumb.jpg.6ea05a752ac6bbf38ae4e7be9676053a.jpg)
Unfortunately, many people consider that because, they have problems with mental health that a local authority should not pursue them for road traffic debts or refer cases to bailiffs. The following recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman is therefore of importance: PS: The following is a short version of the LGO's decision. Please refer to the link at the end of the post to read more. London Borough of Hounslow. The complaint Mr A complains the Council harassed him and discriminated against him by using bailiffs to collect a debt relating to two unpaid Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) when it already had notice of his mental health problems. Mr A maintains the Council should have treated him as a vulnerable adult and told the bailiffs of his condition. He seeks a refund of the enforcement costs he has paid and compensation. What I found Council parking enforcement officers issued Mr A with two PCNs. As Mr A did not pay the charges the Council followed its usual enforcement procedures to obtain payment of the PCNs and the accrued costs. In February 2015, following the Council’s actions in sending out Charge Certificates to Mr A in relation to the PCNs, he wrote to the Council explaining he had mental health problems and enclosed a letter from his GP and the Jobcentre. The Council responded by advising Mr A that while his medical condition had been noted it was not accepted as mitigation to cancel the PCNs. An Order for Recovery was then issued in April for the two charges. As the debt remained unpaid, the Council passed Mr A’s case on to bailiffs acting on its behalf and they wrote to him at the beginning of June. As no response was received, an enforcement agent, Mr X, attended Mr A’s property. Having taken control of Mr A’s vehicle, Mr X spoke to Mr A who informed him of his mental health problems. Mr X told Mr A he had no knowledge of Mr A’s condition but declined Mr A’s request to call his office or the Council to confirm it. Instead, Mr X told Mr A he could seek legal advice. Mr A offered payment by card but made clear he believed he was doing so under duress. Mr X told Mr A it was his choice whether or not to make the payment and Mr A paid the outstanding debt in full. Mr A then made a complaint to the Council about its and the bailiffs’ lack of understanding of his illness and vulnerability and that he had been forced under duress from Mr X to make payment. Having contacted the bailiffs and sought their comments, the Council responded in August 2015 but did not uphold the complaint. It concluded Mr A’s case had been dealt with in an appropriate manner. The Council confirmed it had been aware of his mental health problems but, having considered matters, decided that his particular circumstances did not warrant the cancellation of the PCNs. Because it had decided to pursue the charges, and refer his case on to enforcement agents, it did not consider it necessary to make the agents aware of Mr A’s correspondence about his mental health problems. It did not uphold his complaint. Analysis When Mr A told the Council of his mental health problems, it considered what he had said, and the evidence he had provided, but decided his condition was not sufficient mitigation to stop collection of the charges. It informed him of its decision. The merits of this decision are not open to review by the Ombudsman no matter how strongly Mr A may disagree with it. I have viewed the recording of Mr X’s visit to Mr A’s property. In it Mr A tells Mr X his condition is such that the Council should be working with him to which Mr X replies he can make a payment arrangement with Mr A. He did not doubt Mr A when he was told of Mr A’s mental health problems and told him he could seek legal advice. I saw nothing in Mr X’s behaviour which amounted to harassment or discrimination and he reasonably took the card payment which was offered to him by Mr A. http://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/transport-and-highways/parking-and-other-penalties/16-000-771 -
Hi New to site. I inherited a small property in 2005 and continued dual fuel account with same company. Used property as second home whist renovating it. Decided to rent out as I was then living in Cornwall (330 miles from property) Rented out property in December 2013 to young couple. Took 6 months and a complaint to OS Energy before new account put in female tenant's name, by which time tenant had built up large debt and had DCA calling every day. Tenant's informed me they were vacating by April, 2015. In the meantime I decided to sell property as too many problems with tenants. They did not give me an exact moving out date but eventually moved out on 2 August, 2015 leaving the keys and note with meter reads on with neighbour. Meter reads were correct, so wrote a letter dated 5 August, 2015, enclosing tenant's note to supplier stating that I had taken back property and to put new account in my name and send to Cornwall address. Property had been sold so it would remain empty so expected to be put on standard tariff, 3 monthly bills. Unbeknown to me the supplier had received call from tenant on 4 August, 2015 and she gave them a 'false' name for the person due to take over the supply. It was 3 to 4 months before I realised what was happening. I wrote to supplier in November, 2015 explained the situation and again asking for account to be put in my name. Roll on January, 2016 up on a visit to the property, a couple more bills in the 'false' name. So I started emailing the supplier's complaints department, requesting they halt any action on the account until my complaint had been sorted. I opened one of the bills and it was estimated as approx. £700 owing. Obviously as the property had been unoccupied sine tenants had left, I knew about only 10% of this figure was actually used, mostly standing charges. On 29 January, 2016, I returned to property to find supplier's agent just leaving having just fitted ext. prepayment gas meter. When I explained who I was and what the situation was, he contacted his office, gave them the actual meter reads and an account was set up in my name and Cornwall address. He was instructed to put the original meter back. Which he partly did and put a sealing disc in the supply effectively cutting off the gas. The gas could not be used as it needed commissioning. I then had to arrange for the system to be drained to prevent frost damage. I emailed supplier giving them 7 days to fix the gas supply. They ignored my request. The new owner took over the utilities on 8 February, 2016 and arranged for registered plumber to recharge system and gas supply and then sent me the bill for nearly £200. I have since discovered that the supplier merely changed the name on the account and expected me to pay the charges on the account (for letter and agent visit) In an email from the supplier they indicate they did not respond to my contacts due to the DPA and I was not the named account holder. The bills they sent me, 2 both dated 29 January, 2016 and the final bill dated 17 February, 2016 are estimated, contain the charges and have the same account number as the 'false' name one. I also started a complaint with the OS Energy on 16 January 2016 (8 weeks after I complained to supplier in Nov, 2015) In March, 2016, I received email from supplier after I had told them I had started complaint with OS Energy. The supplier offered to simply zero the estimated bill and contribute towards plumber's bill. I had previously informed them I would wait for the OS decision and they should also do same. According to the info I have researched, the supplier did NOT obtain a warrant, did not write informing that pp meter would be fitted giving 28 days warning. They did not offer any payment plans. They are also required to send 7 day warning letter about fitting pp meter. They did but it arrived several days after they had fitted meter and was dated 29 January, same day as pp meter fitted. So as far as I'm concerned they breached Ofgem rules for fitting pp meter. I will let you digest this part of the story before telling the rest of the saga (or farce). Perhaps you can recognise which supplier is involved? -
A very popular enquiry that appears on the forum concerns bailiff enforcement for arrears of council tax in relation to a previous property and where notification of the arrears is only known when a bailiff visits the individuals new address. In the first instance, the vast majority of people pay their yearly council tax by direct debit. When a person moves from an address, there are usual steps that will be undertaken by the homeowner. Taking a reading of the gas or electricity meters is one such obvious step. Another obvious step should be to inform the local authority of the moving out date. The council will then adjust the yearly council tax bill. The council will request a new address so that a final bill can be sent. The individual should not cancel their previous direct debit without first contacting the council. If they do so, and there are council tax arrears, the council may issue a summons and the regulations (in this case, Regulation 35.2© of the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992) are very clear, in that the summons is deemed served if sent by post to the individuals usual or last known place of abode. If a Liability Order is granted for the arrears, it can be passed to a firm of bailiffs to enforce. Before a personal visit is made, the enforcement company must send a Notice of Enforcement. Once again, the regulations (in this case, Regulations 8 of the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013) are very clear in that the Notice of Enforcement is deemed served if it is posted to the address where the individual usually lives. If the individual moves from his previous address and fails to contact the council to settle his council tax bill and provide a new address, then naturally the Notice of Enforcement will be sent to 'the last known place of abode' (i.e. the previous address). If a subsequent complaint is made to the Local Government Ombudsman, it will usually be the case that they will not will find fault with the local authority. The following are two recent decisions from the Ombudsman on this very subject:
-
Hi all. I recently read in the Sunday Times that even though some banks have told customers that they cannot find records regarding potential PPI claims because the claims are regarding loans that were over 6 years ago, once the Ombudsman has got involved, some banks have 'found' the records stored on 'legacy computer systems or microfiche'. This sounds too good to be true.....is there any truth in this, please?
-
Regulator the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which no longer deals with complaints flight delays and cancellations, has announced that a total of 20 airlines have now signed up to approved 'Alternative Dispute Resolution' (ADR) bodies. Customers with complaints aginst those airlines who have signed up with the Retail Ombudsman will have thier case dealt with free of charge. But British Airways, easyjet and Thomas Cook have signed with CEDR which charges customers a £25 fee for unsuccessful claims for compensation https://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/Resolving-travel-problems/How-the-CAA-can-help/Alternative-dispute-resolution/ Retail Ombudsman Air Astana, Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge,Asiana Airlines EgyptAir , Flybe, Ryanair, SkyWorks Airlines AG, South African Airways TAP Portugal Turkish Airlines, Wizz Air Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) British Airways, easyJet, Thomas Cook, Thomson (TUI) -
Hi, I'm a First Direct Customer and have had a mortgage with them for over 15 years. I am so impressed with their customer service, that I bought their buildings insurance. I've had the policy for donkey's years. In May 2015 I had a leak which came in from the next door neighbour. The ingress of water stayed well below the joists and never damaged any flooring or contents. I repeat, water never ever at any point damaged any of the building or my personal belongings! Asprea, which is a claims management company which is owned by Aviva, assigned a surveyor to manage the claim. However, back at Asprea they were going through a restructure, and the surveyor who was assigned was made redundant. He was never replaced. As such, the builders assigned to do the work had nobody there to control them. The repair contractor brought in by Asprea, a company called Alltrades, went on the do the following to my home and personal property, without my permission and knowledge. 1. Remove all the floorboards from the Dining Room, Hallway and Front Living Room. 2. Remove my entire kitchen (cupboards, tiled flooring, contents), which sits on a concrete base, and as such is completely impervious to water. The kitchen was thrown into a skip. 3. Remove all the wallpaper from the dining room, hallway stairs and landing, and front room. You're probably wondering at this point why I've not mentioned anything about the contents of the kitchen, front room and dining room. Well, they were all wrecklessly dumped and damaged into the upstairs 3 bedrooms. The builders, aren't members of any recognised professional organisation in the building trade - such as the federation of master builders, the national federation of builders, or trustmark. I have pictures of everything which I sent to the company, and I have also created a YouTube video showing the chaos left by Asprea and their contractors. The company, Aviva or Asprea has never said sorry, nor has it responded in writing to written complaints, and has just told the Financial Ombudsman that it intends to stop paying for my alternative accommodation at the end of June. I have been out of my house for 11 months, and have moved 15 times!!! 15 times!!! I was forced to live in the following accommodation: 9 days -Stayed in Bedsit 83 days -Lived in a converted garage 6 days -Stayed in Hotel Rooms 20 days -Stayed with Friends 187 days -Not a "like-for-like" property, ongoing Electrical wiring and plumbing problems. Poorly maintained Aviva and Asprea cut all contact with me in December 2015, 6 months ago, without notice or reason. The company has lied to the Ombudsman about what is damaged in the house, and so I have a surveyor coming on Wednesday 18th May 2016, to do a detailed report of what is damaged. What is actually damaged is considerably more than what Asprea claim. Aviva have said that I shouldn't get 1 penny in compensation! one penny! The report will cost me well over £800 to have written. I have just spoken to my household insurer and they tell me that I have legal cover of up to £100,000 to take Aviva to court. I have lots of clear photographs and documents that show everything Asprea have done. The legal advice that I have just received said that it is a cut and dried case of negligence, because of the volume and quality of evidence I have. My case has just moved from Adjudication stage to the full ombudsman. If Aviva (well Asprea) try to evict me onto the street, I'll have no choice but to invoke the legal cover through my household insurance to prevent this! I cannot be turned out into the street. They have broken my home and damaged all of my contents! This is plain just wrong! My video on YouTube is called "My banking and insurance Horror Story - Battle with First Direct Bank and Aviva Insurance". I would urge you to look at it and give me your opinions. Please bear with the length of the video. As you know, long and complex stories are really difficult to edit down. The video does however cut to the chase reasonably quickly to the photographs of the damage. I had no idea that Aviva operated in such a poor and wreckless way, and it's customer service is none existing. I would welcome people to share their experiences of the company, including Asprea. Kind Regards and thanks for listening!, David -
Hello I'm new here, but just wondered if anyone has experience with successfully challenging and overthrowing an ombudsman's final decision. The Financial ombudsman has made lots of poor excuses and failed to look at the significant evidence that yes car credit/direct auto have mis sold ppi and other insurances without permission. Many thanks if u can advise -
I would appreciate some advice, please 50 + years ago - OH was involved in an accident whilst playing football. He was a goalkeeper - took a dive to save a ball and was kicked in the top of the spine. He was taken to hospital with a suspected fracture. X-rays didn't show anything seriously damaging although there were some problems with his back / walking. Was kept in hospital for a couple of weeks and was then sent home. Over the years, because of the pain, he contorted his body to alleviate this and developed a kind of weird posture. 30 years ago, he was taken into hospital with a suspected heart attack. After many tests it was discovered that he hadn't had a heart attack as such - the way in which he had held his body to spare himself pain - his spine had curved inwards and was pressing on his heart and lungs. Further investigation found that he had some crumbled discs. He had an operation to hoover out all the bits that were messing with the nerves and after a couple of weeks was sent back home. He developed a paraplegic leg because of this and was fitted with a brace to help with walking. He was retired on the grounds of ill health. About 12 months ago, his other leg started to weaken. His GP referred him to a Neurologist at our local hospital and this is where things started to go pear shaped. The Consultant referred him onto something called One Health, which is apparently a NHS/Private Health initiative. He was sent an appointment to a clinic some miles away - took us over an hour to get there. All that happened here was a fact finding mission on OH's health (which surely they should have been provided with from either the GP or the hospital)? So that visit was purely taken up with getting OH's medical history ! He was then sent an appointment to go to a private hospital in Grantham (over 80 miles away). Problem here was that : He wasn't to drive himself home after the treatment - I could have driven him home, except the idea was that he would go to the appointment early as a day patient - he would have the procedure and then would not know for 4-6 hours afterwards whether he was going to be discharged or ambulanced to another hospital in Sheffield which was another 40 mile journey. So, had I gone with him - I would have had to wait around with 2 dogs and then not know if he was coming home or not and if not, I would have had to drive home on my own - a journey I had never done before. Fortunately a friend offered to do this for us - the procedure was done and he was discharged 5 hours later - and told that he would have a follow up telephone consultation in August. We had believed that they were going to be injecting him with something that would support and cushion any damaged discs - this wasn't so, although we didn't know this until a few days ago. OH was still in considerable pain and on Thursday he took a tumble. We contacted his GP only to be told we had to make contact with the Consultant who did the procedure. As he, the GP, was not aware of what was going on. When we finally tracked someone down - were told OH could either go to Ossett, in West Yorkshire for an immediate consultation or wait until the following day for a telephone consult ! The journey was out of the question. When the Consultant phoned the following day - we were more or less advised that OH could be sent to anywhere in the Country - Scotland even, if that is the place they have a space or consultation time ? It was in this call that we learned that the procedure that had taken place was some kind of dye had been injected into him to see where the problem was ! Surely at this point they should have realised what the problem is/was and made an appointment for the surgery which it is obvious is going to have to take place. The Chap we spoke to on the phone has said that an appointment to see a Consultant Neurology Surgeon will be made and sent to OH ! Has anyone else been put on this type of NHS/Private Initiative and what is their opinion please ? Is it likely the National Health Ombudsman will look at this. Do we have a complaint even, or is this the way forward with the NHS of the future ?
-
I was left with no option by my bank RBS but to submit a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman in my dispute with them. The dispute relates to Personal Guarantees for my former business which ceased trading last year and is now formally dissolved. The Adjudicator is claiming they can't consider the case as I am neither a 'consumer' as the finance is considered to have been 'acting for purposes within my trade, business, craft or profession.' nor a 'micro enterprise' as the business 'isn't capable of being represented and it can't raise a complaint'. They've used a court case BlueFin v Ombudsman to support their position with regards to my not being a consumer. So, despite having been a victim of extremely poor practice by RBS I am caught out by this Catch 22. Anyone had a similar experience or can provide any pointers on how I could challenge their response? -
There has been much debate on the forum regarding the important subject of 'vulnerability' when a debt (usually council tax arrears) is being enforced by a bailiff. Many posters have different opinions as to whether or not, when vulnerability is identified, the account should be returned to the local authority and bailiff fees removed, or managed by the enforcement companies in house Welfare Dept etc etc. Whilst opinions will no doubt vary on this very important subject, it may be of interest to know what the Local Government Ombudsman's view is of this subject. If a debtor wishes to have a complaint considered by the Local Government Ombudsman, they must first take their complaint to the relevant local authority and exhaust the first stage and second stage complaints procedure. The complaint may then be considered by the LGO. All Local Government Ombudsman's decisions are reported on-line. These reports are made public 3 months after the final decision. The local authorities name is revealed but the complainants details are not.
-
I mentioned yesterday on the forum that since the new regulations came into effect in April 2014, the Local Government Ombudsman has dealt with 304 enquiries relating to a council tax complaint that involved bailiff enforcement, and 418 enquiries relating to a penalty charge notice (including congestion charging) that involved bailiff enforcement. The following decision has just been released and again, another local authority has agreed to refund bailiff fees an Out of Time witness statement has been accepted at the Traffic Enforcement Centre. The following is an extract of the decision. Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Mrs X complains the Council failed to refund bailiff costs and the parking fine following the decision of the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC). Background: 4 The Council issued a penalty charge notice (PCN) to Mrs X. It says Mrs X did not either appeal the notice or pay the fine. The Council continued to take action to recover the outstanding amount which resulted in bailiffs visiting Mrs X’s property. 5 Mrs X says the first time she knew of the PCN was when the bailiffs visited. She says she panicked when the bailiffs attended and so paid the fine in full. Afterwards she decided to challenge the recovery as she had never received the PCN. Mrs X made a late appeal to the TEC. Her appeal was upheld. 6 The bailiff sent a cheque to Mrs X for £310 on 17 February 2016. This was the return of their fees following the decision of the TEC. The Council retained £82 which is the original penalty charge of £50, £25 for the non- payment before the Council sent a charge certificate and £7 for the debt registration. 7 The Council says it has retained this amount because it did not form part of the TEC decision. It says at no time has Mrs X challenged the PCN and so it is still valid. 8. In response to my enquiries the Council says it will reissue the Notice to Owner to Mrs X. This will give her the opportunity to challenge the original PCN. If it is found the PCN was not correctly issued the Council should make a further refund. Final Decision: My decision is the complaint will not be pursued further. The return of the bailiff fees has provided a remedy for most of Mrs X’s complaint. When we spoke on the telephone previously, she said this is what she was seeking. In addition the Council will now reissue the Notice to Owner which gives Mrs X the right to appeal the PCN if she considers it was wrongly issued. I consider this provides a suitable remedy for Mrs X’s complaint so I will not pursue it further. http://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/transport-and-highways/parking-and-other-penalties/15-017-156
-
July7th 2016 Back in April 2011, I issued through Bailiff Studies Centre a discussion document (number three in the series) entitled "Do we need an enforcement services ombudsman?" The query was met with enthusiasm from some and wariness by others. Since then, of course, matters have moved on considerably. At the time of writing it still appeared likely that the Security Industry Authority would have some regulatory role in the sector and that the introduction of the reformed regime of bailiff law would lead to a considerable strengthening of the procedures for licencing and monitoring individual agents. None of that happened. The SIA dropped out of the picture and the rejigged certification process brought in to the Civil Procedure Rules in 2014 is very far from comprehensive or robust. We were promised thorough training for county court district judges; there is little evidence of this. A recent issue of Bailiff Studies Bulletin highlighted some of the problems with the qualifications upon which certificates are issued and there is, of course, no regulation of agencies, only individual agents- a bizarre result in the early 21st century. We still lack any sector overview and any industry wide maintenance of standards or best practice. It seems to me that there is still a very strong argument for some for of regulator (the commercial body Ombudsman Services were interested in the function five years ago). I would propose, too, that this regulation is not limited to enforcement agents and agencies. I suggest that there would be a useful function for all parties (not just debtors) for those offering advice on bailiff law also to be regulated. With the proliferation of web based advice and consumer forums, I believe that there may be a role in setting and maintaining standards wherever consumers are asked to pay for advice on dealing with debt enforcement. John Kruse debt & money trainer & consultant, author -
Hi All, I have around 6 complaints with the FOS. 2 of which have already been looked at by an Adjudicator who rejected them both. When she did she told me that an Ombudsman will probably side with her? Is this right? I have complained to her Manager as I really felt that she was biased from the start. I have asked for an Ombudsman to look at them but now after what she said I am wandering if its worth it. Luckily my other 4 complaints are now being investigated by another adjudicator as I requested. Any help would be appreciated. -
All Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) decisions appear on the LGO website six months after the date of the decision. Personal information about the complainant is naturally removed but the name of the relevant local authority is made public. For this discussion thread I have only selected important decisions that concern council tax enforcement where a liability order had been obtained and passed to an enforcement company. Although the following decision relates to events prior to the new regulations taking effect (April 2014) it is nonetheless a very important one to refer to. The decision date was August 2014 and was published November 2014. The local authority is London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham and the complaint made by the debtor was that: The debtor was vulnerable and the local authority should not have referred to account to bailiffs. That the council forwarded payments to the bailiff company. The council refused to recall debt from the bailiff company.
-
I have a complaint that has now reached the ombudsman after the adjudicator decided in my favour and asked for interest to be refunded, but the company appealed. The Ombudsman has my credit file but has now asked for bank statements which the adjudicator was fine not seeing before.. These are a mission to get as the accounts were all closed years ago, and I was juggling multiple accounts as I had so many loans and they are asking for 2 years of statements.. My question is, would you send them if you were me or just give up. It has been a long irritating road to here, I am pretty unwell and this will add more irritation for a couple hundred quid. I had gambling issues at the time (which I have told my adjudicator) - I was selling stuff from catalogues on ebay which may look like extra income, but it was not it was to gamble and also live. I had around 12 PDLs, 10 catalogue accounts, multiple credit cards etc. All my household bills were paid from my ex partners account as I could not get a house, or electric direct debit, sky etc due to my crappy credit score so they aren't on the statements, my statements will show salary, gambling, ebay sales and probably my train to work.. which I have also pointed out to the adjudicator.. and I am not contacting my ex to ask for her statements as I cannot face it.. I will probably keep on with it and see it through but do you think I will be out of luck here, or get in any kind of trouble for selling stuff from catalogues years ago? Just some advice needed. -
A staggering 96% of complaints resolved by the Energy Ombudsman last year resulted in an award to consumers, far exceeding other sectors. The figures reveal that more consumers are taking action against poor service, with a growing awareness that you have somewhere to turn if things go wrong. The Ombudsman tackled 61,019 cases – compared with 26,760 in 2013/14. Almost 9 in 10 complaints referred to the Ombudsman involved billing issues, with bungled supplier transfers and misleading sales contributing to most of the other complaints. Read more: http://www.which.co.uk/news/2016/04/energy-ombudsman-complaints-hit-new-high-440901/ - Which?
-
I complained about Capital One who were harassing me with phone calls even though I had already told them not to contact me by phone but to write me letters or emails. I logged a 5 week period and they phoned me about 130 times. I complained to the Ombudsman service and after their investigation their representative basically come to the conclusion that Capital One were perfectly within their rights to phone me 130 times in a 5 week period.I was astounded. Capital One without taking any blame offered me £75 as a goodwill gesture,which I turned down. I was claiming £600 compensation for harassment which the Ombudsman rep basically stated I had no chance of getting in his first phone call to me, even before he had done his investigation. Anyway, I did some research and appealed to an actual Ombudsman. I included in my appeal quotes from a judgment from a UK high court in a similar case to mind, which wiped the floor with the logic of the guy who conducted the initial investigation. My appeal was successful and the Ombudsman offered me £400 compensation, which I accepted. I believe I could have got a lot more if I had by passed the Ombudsman and gone to court. So even though I was successful in the end, I expect a lot of people would have stopped when the original decision was in the negative. I really do not think a lot of the Ombudsman service, it was like the guy who conducted the original investigation was working for Capital One because he was just repeating what they had told me before. Absolute disgrace and I told him so.
-
Approx two years ago the Local Government Ombudsman changed the way in which they record decisions. Previously, when a final decision was made, copies would be sent to the relevant local authority and the complainant. The significance of the change was that all decisions are now made public on the LGO website three months after the decision. There have been quite a few recent decisions made to the Local Government Ombudsman concerning successful Out of Time witness statements to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the position regarding 'bailiff fees'. Up until this decision, most local authorities when notified of a successful Out of Time witness statement will refund some or all of the amount of the PCN...and will then advise the individual that they must contact the bailiff company for a refund. Out of Time witness statements and the Traffic Enforcement Centre are subjects that I am passionate about and this is why I am DELIGHTED to read this very recent decision (made public on 23rd March 2016) from the LGO regarding London Borough of Haringey. The LGO advised LB of Haringey that they should refund Miss X the following amounts: Charge certificate surcharge of £65 TEC court fee of £7 Bailiff fees of £310. Analysis: Item 17: As detailed at Paragraph 15, the TEC’s decision to accept Miss X’s late witness statement ordered that recovery action be taken back to the original PCN. While the Council says it has discretion over whether to refund fees in this situation as the TEC’s decision makes no direction on this point, the TEC’s decision clearly directs the revocation of the order for recovery and the cancellation of the charge certificate. These documents form the basis of the Council’s action from December 2013, as well as the further fees added to Miss X’s debt. Item 18. The Ombudsman considers in this situation that as the TEC has withdrawn the basis for the fees, the Council cannot legitimately refuse to refund them. Had the TEC’s decision not intended to result in this action it would be meaningless as it would have no effect. I therefore consider that the Council’s refusal to refund the fees resulting from steps in the process which the TEC has ordered are cancelled, is fault. http://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/transport-...ties/15-000-612
-
Hi, What do you think I should do? I ordered Business Fibre 152mb broadband in January 2015 Virgin required a £230 deposit which I paid. It is now a year later, hundreds of emails and hours of calls and 6 missed apointments and we seem no closer to an actual installation. Costs initially escalated from £60 for the install to a couple of hundred, and 2 months in I opted for a government Connection Voucher to cover it. Since then they have continued to rise and I've continued to agree to them as they are still less than the grant. Highlights include: a 3 month wait while Virgin was emailing the wrong email address to get the installation started being asked to pay £3895 excess costs which turned out to be a basic algebra error resulting from adding the £3000 connection voucher grant and actual £895 costs together waiting for contractors to not show up to do work on 6 different weekends I made a formal complaint in October and have a reference for it, but all the complaints department do is chase their Manilla call centre to give me an update, which typically doesn't contain any information. It has been a very frustrating year and the practical and financial impact on my business is huge. There is also no sign this is going to end with Virgin actually getting round to the installation... I've thought about complaining to CISAS, which is the ombudsman Virgin Media seem to be linked to, what should i be asking them for? Is there anything else I could do? -
Hi everyone, I'm a newbie on here (2nd post) and think I just made my first school boy error - spent hours (literally) tying up my obviously massive story, then go to post - and I'm timed out. Lesson learnt. So I'll attempt to be as succinct as possible this time but it's nott an easy story to tell, so bear with me pls! I initially incurred debt with RBS in 2002 after losing my Father. Things are a bit foggy about that year or two in my life but I accept I incurred a debt of around £3,000. After a few negotiations as I remember, the debt was passed to a collections agency - Wecott Debt Recovery. I made an arrangement with them to repay the debt. A debt which I have not defaulted on in one single month in 11 years to date. The debt now stands at just under £400. (Now the interesting bit!).... In March 2006 I start receiving really quite offensive letters from a company I had never heard of until then. Namely Capquest. I know for a fact that - silly as it seems - I did make erratic one-off payments to them over the years that followed and as the tone and frequency of their actions seemingly had no limits, I even had my poor Mum make a payment or two for me. Not because I asked her - but because they began to phone my Mother's landline and speak to her about my debt!. Then my 88-year-old Grandmother started getting the calls too...:mad: I eventually made more payments to them but only on the basis I was disputing the entire debt and that it be put 'on hold' until sorted out properly. This was some time in 2009. This managed to keep them quiet - despite the odd phonecall or letter - for a time. In early 2011 I start getting mail sent to my Mothers address again. The threatening stuff; doorstep collections; court action; 'freezing of my wages' etc. I got on the phone to the bunch and set things straight. I spoke to a senior manager (whom I won't name...yet) who explained he had looked over my account and although I wasn't to 'get too excited' - he thought I had made an overpayment and might be entitled to some form of rebate. This did actually make sense and I did believe this guy's sincerity. I agreed to speak with them in depth (Capquest). It turned out they didn't have a clue about pretty much anything. Nothing other than they represented RBS (their client) and the debt (of just over £3,000-odds) had been sold to them in 2006. Exactly when the letters and phonecalls started.... At this point I decided I needed to do some serious research on my own. The obvious thing that stood out to me was the potential for RBS to have mis-sold (illegally????) my 'debt' information onto a 2nd collections agency (remembering I had a flawless arrangement in place with Wescott for this very debt since early 2004). The more phonecalls I made and letters I sent, the deeper this story seemed to go... Wescott Opinions:Flawless Client who took on his debt and repayed by s/o as agreed & on time Capquest Opinions: Quote(!) 'Wescott have been paying us. You make payment to them, and they make payments to us'. I'm beyond confused. I write directly to RBS demanding answers. I get a one page response saying effectively that are not legally obliged to provide any information regarding the account as it's been over 6 years since the inception of the debt. They're not even obliged to tell me how much the debt had initially been. Onto the Ombudsman. I write a HUGE report detailing everything (even more than I've rant on here). I get a message back to say they can't entertain it (the 6 year rule again). I write an appeal and ask that they read my report in full and consider that the case is not over 6 years old but that it is ongoing - as I am still receiving threatening letters. They reply they have reconsidered and take on my case. :T It's almost 5 months later and despite keeping in touch with the Ombudsman, it's taken this long for them to investigate it. I got a phonecall from the Ombudsman last week. They explained RBS wanted to make me an offer. I got excited - I thought this had all paid off, all this stress and worry - but I needn't have been. The offer the Ombudsman had was from RBS directly and was simply 'to nulify the debt'. I made it politely clear I rejected their offer. The Ombudsman acknowledged this. NOW THIS IS THE BIT I NEED A HELP WITH; I heard from the Ombudsman at the beginning of this week. They say the only way they can make the financial aspect of my offer more preferable and recoup my overpayments, I must provide receipts of the transactions made directly to Capquest. This is just not possible. I have spent days speaking with my Banks callcentre, I've even been with an appointment with my Bank manager who could see my predicament, buy couldn't help me out. The receipts the Ombudsman is requesting is simply impossible evidence to request. I've now been told I have one week to provide this evidence before the Ombudsman rules. Can anyone who has read this post (and thank you anyone that has!) advise on ANY aspect of my situation? I can't explain how frustrating it is to almost have won my battle after all these years - but be just a piece of paper away from losing it al too. Has anyone else been in this position? Has anyone taken court action against a Bank in this kind of circumstance? Clearly, ANY advice is very greatly appreciated! Sincerely, Openwater -
Hi all A quick update on my final 3 complaints regarding irresponsible lending all with the Financial Ombudsman Wageday Advance - complaint rejected by adjudicator. escalated to an Ombudsman who has disagreed with adjudicator and will give final response this week. Lending Stream - received e-mail from adjudicator upholding my complaint. She has written to lending Stream with her response asking them to refund all interest on all loans. They can refer to an Ombudsman and I think they probably will as they have been awkward throughout the whole process although she has said unless they can come up with more information then the outcome is unlikely to be different. PoundstoPocket - heard from adjudicator, he is hoping to provide a response by the end of this week. Nearly at the end of a long struggle with payday lenders. So far have had refunds from 7 out of 10 lenders and it looks promising for the other 3. Would advise anyone in a similar situation to make a complaint.
