Financial ombudsman comes under fire as insider reveals litany of bad practices

[red-ed]

More Breaking News

 

Insurance companies with misleading web sites that state one thing (£100 excess) on the web site when you buy the policy and then confirm another different thing (£400 excess) in the policy send out by post, and then ignore 12 letters and numerous phone calls to query/correct this, and therefore take away the right to cancel, are only PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE, and were asked to pay just £30 in compensation.

 

I am starting to think the FOS sole role is to legalise and encourage financial fraud.

 

Interested to hear what others feel about this!

 

Ed

[johnstanton1954]

I agree that the Financial Ombudsman is badly organised and not doing it's job. I've made a complaint about insurance and been told it will be 12 to 16 weeks before my case will be looked at.

[johnstanton1954]

In terms of the e-petition, couldn't the first part be deleted and the rest kept (something along the lines of the following - this may be accepted as it's not asking the Government to disband what is there but rather just create something new and better)

 

Her Majesty's Treasury

 

The Government should establish a new regulatory body (paid for by taxes) to represent ordinary people in disputes with financial organisations.

 

The new organisation must have the full backing of the law to protect the everyday person and what they have worked for.

 

The new organisation must also put the public first before the banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions.

[red-ed]

i agree, but they must limited to enforcing the law, not making or adapting or overriding law. They should also be forced to resolve all complaints in 30 days - if necessary by using 'open' hearings/internet comms/etc - and fine the hell out financial companies use them as a second line of support. The adjudicators also need to significantly better qualified and complaints process 'independent'. Lastly, the trustees or who ever oversees the unit must come from the public not establishment.

 

Ed

 

Ps - the FOS is a sham - it only there to stop the public suing financial firms - it is not about protecting the public from unscrupulous financial firms.

[AuntieP]

Try this site for launching a petition

http://www.change.org/en-GB?utm_medium=email&utm_source=signature_receipt&utm_campaign=new_signature

[everpresent]

Found these responses facinating, in 2009 I bought a section 75 to the FOS, who made a complete bodge job of it, infact it took them 2& half years to come to a decision, & that was because I got a leagl opinion that blew their arguments out of the water, it involved Nationwide Building society, who are & as I have seen on this site, too my cost the most vicious, malicious lowlifes I have ever encountered, basically twice during the claim they sold the debt onto debt collection agencies, then at the end of the FOS decision in my favour: by the way the outcome was so poor I am now in court action against the Nationwide:they were forced by the debt agency to buy the debt back, then after the initial court hearing when they told the judge they wanted to mediate, they sold the debt again without informing me, again damaging my credit, oh & in between that they sent me an out of court without prejudice offer as long as they gagged me into the bargain!!!

They are evil, malicious,they try every dirty trick in the book, ignore emails ignore letters, fail to respond to phonecalls when they say they'll get back to you. Pure vindictive, nasty individuals who try to goad you & then turn the story around to make it look like you are the aggressor,

The ombudsman gave me the wrong information regarding the actions I could take that the independent assessor reviewed critised them & then offered me £45 in compensation!!!! I to am looking at getting the media involved having seen the FOS CEO this morning telling sky news how they must challenge the customer approach of these financial institutions, see if she puts her money where her mouth is ??

[everpresent]

Just remember as of 2010 the law on this changed & if you accept the ombudsmans decision & then try to persue the company afterwards through the courts, this is not allowed, I found this out & it would have been extremely costly had I followed the advice of one of the FOS ombudsmans managers,I found out this was wrong through a friend who was a solicitor & the independent assessor confirmed that, mind you though apart from that she, the Independent assessor, was as much use as a chocolate firegard!!!

[gfj]

Hi I wonder if you can help me I am at my wits end I own aproperty with my ex-girlfriend, We split up in 2006 with her living at theproperty with the children after a court ruling which also confirmed she wasentitled to half the house it was agreed by private arrangement between us as Ihad paid the first half of the mortgage on my own with no help from my ex, Andas she was entitled to half she should pay for half, my ex agreed and for 5 years I now know thiswas the case

Now over a year ago I was solicited by a ppi claim firm so Irang the mortgage company to find out if ppi was on my mortgage only to be told"was I aware that my mortgage was on interest only payments"!! And totop it had been this way for 36 months

The mortgage works (TMW) now part of nationwide buildingsociety has made major changes to my mortgage without my knowledge or consent!And I believe has resulted in a breach of their contract and also failing toput in place after a reasonable time period (I am informed by TMW of it beingapproximately 3 months) a capital repayment vehicle all of which would beacceptable to themselves, all of this is printed in bold letters on everyletter i now receive

I complained which resulted in the mortgage being revertingback to repayment, My ex refused to pay, I offered to allow interest only if myex via a solicitor put forward a plan to pay the capital as per their ownpaperwork and rules they refused to get involved!! even though they had causedthis problem. And the property fell into arrears and then TMW startedrepossession proceedings and the property is now up and is in the last stagesof selling. There is a court order pending for repossession on 7th January2014.

TMW refused the complaint saying they were following rulesset by the fos and acting fairly to my ex on low income (but not fairly tome!)and it was then sent to the fos who also refused my complaint (no wonder ifindeed the fos rules allowed this to happen) without no mention of the timeallowed on interest only, no vehicle in place etc let alone my consent, notupholding any part of my complaint and taking no notice of my updates into thefailings and conversations with TMW. Indeed saying I should take my ex to court

I am indeed thinking about this but feel that had i beenasked at the time I would have answered the same, my ex to put in place avehicle to pay capital and if not the property would have sold then! Not witharrears on it, letters, and court costs and as no payments have been made forthe last 5 months due to TMW informing my ex of my liability a high redemptionfigure. Also as my consent was not sort, I have lost approximately £8000 incapital payments had to reduce the property so to get a quick sale beforerepossession and the fact selling wasn't in the plans the property wasn'treally ready for sale and TMW have to be held to account for this? When werethey going to tell me? When I was liable for £35000-£70000?? at the end of themortgage term.

I also feel that the fos has treated me unfairly as TMW ishiding behind fos rules and a quick look on their website has resulted in themupholding far less involved cases! One involving early redemption clausessaying their costs and terms was hidden on page 5 subsec 24! And even payingout for his distress! My rules come on every letter and underlined and in boldtype.

TMW have said that they didn't have a forwarding address forme but I informed them that I had indeed left the property and their obligationto both parties ref in a letter sent by my solicitor back in 2006 referring topayment changes which they have still on file

What conversations TMW have had with my ex in relation to meI do not know and indeed my ex has never said and has obviously deceived me atevery stage but if she was asked or told changes would require my signature shecould have passed me letters or asked me at any stage I was in contact viaphone, text, email, facebook, work, etc and seeing my children on a weekly basis's and I was indeed relaxedabout the property due to what I thought was the safety of two signatures andthe mortgage contract.

And as I was no fixed abode for 5 years after eviction Icould give no address

You can’t even begin to understand the stress this hasbrought to me out of the blue and to my current partner who is having to go throughthis with me, something we both agree should have been sorted out three or moreyears ago before we met

TMW has failed to act in the best interest of both of itsclients and acting impartially, swinging to my ex and leaving me exposed.

Do I have any recourse in relation to these sets ofcircumstances?

I await your response in anticipation due to the imminentforced sale of my property and once these matters are closed redress may beimpossible to come by?

[maybelline]

The interest calculation can be worked out. If you have paid say regular monthly payments of £10 over a 27 month period your interest calculation would be:

 

month one = 10 x 27 x (0.08/12) where 10 is the monthly sum, 27 is the term and .08/12 is the monthly interest.

month 2 = 10 x 26 x (0.8/12)

and so on until month 1

month one is 10 x 1 x .08/12

 

The formula to calculate the lot in one sum is as follows, since the 27th term is [10 x .08/12] x 27

and the 1st term is [10 x .08/12] x 1

the the average is 27 +1 /2 = 14

 

to the total of the terms is n/2 [10 x .08/12]

= 14[10 x .08/12]

 

that is the interest for the full term at 8% now just add the principal.

 

If the sums vary every month then set up a spread sheet for all the terms starting at the full term if its 60 month then you need 60 lines

 

the first line wil be of columns

 

sum interest/month term Total

6.80 .08/12 60 x

 

then after you have calcualted all the terms add up the x column.

 

Let me know if you have any problems.

 

If there is a difference to your calcualtion and theirs send them a copy of your calculation and ask them to provide theirs.

 

If you need a compount interst it is slightly different , let me know.

 

Don't forget, you do not have to accept the Ombdsman's diescision, you can still go to court and the fact that you have been to the ombudsman should count as arbitration. The court likes to see if you have exhausted every avenue to settle before going to court.

 

The thing you must do is to explain fully why you don't agree with the Ombudman's descision and/or why you don't agree with the interst calculation.

 

regards

 

ieuan

 

FOS have calculated my claim for charges to be repaid, and have added 8% simple interest annual. wouldnt this be daily? I seem to recall a spreadsheet calculation that calculates from the day the charge was applied. isnt this what FOS should offer?

[charleydj]

Totally agree with this. 6 months my complaint has been completed. It has been only partially ruled in my favour, despite me providing the only evidence. The main evidence being credit file information sent to Equifax by Barclays and Bank Statements sent to me from Barclays, clearly proving Barclays have sent incorrect information to the file.

 

Despite me clearly explaining the issue neither Barclays or the Ombudsman are listening and the ombudsman has ruled that the information Barclays has sent to Equifax ( and the other credit reference agencies), is correct. This is most definitely not the case.

[The Famous Cash]

I regret I have to add my voice to those claiming The Financial Ombudsman is faulty.

 

Llyods TSB ADMITTED they mis-sold my disabled son insurances. They apologised profusely and gave full repayment of premiums and token compensation.

They also mis-sold loans and overdraft but, somehow, they were not mis-sold and the Financial Ombudsman has let them get away with it!

 

What could be more obvious?

 

 

 

The Financial Ombudsman? A JOKE!

[san_d]

Maybe people have too high expectations from the OM. What they do, it's a bit like a giant customer service saying: "Sorry". That's it.

[parity4all]

My case with the FOS is becoming more complicated with more and more people getting involved and the all seem to draw conclusions without examining all of the relevant facts. I am beginning to wonder whether this is a tactic by the FOS to get me so frustrated that I will give the fight. One thing I would like to know however, who funds the FOS?

 

Of course this is a tactic. My complaint about an adjudicator was handled by his manager, then when I said I disagreed with the Manager's decision I was given names of a senior manager (who was on leave) and an executive assistant. I wrote to the executive assistant detailing the points of what I disagreed with. In the meantime the senior manager had written back (before receiving my e-mail, hence, without considering my points).

 

However, I only communicated with one of the senior staff (the executive assistant). I think this helps, to keep things simple. Although, the executive assistant herself said that it had got far too complicated and referred me to the external assessor.

[The Famous Cash]

My claim against Lloyds bank (the most complained about business in UK) was sent with irrefutable evidence to the FO. Case was fast tracked because disabled person on whose behalf I was claiming was under great stress. Case still took nearly a year. Rejected by adjudicator. Appeal was rejected by ombudsman. Now suing Lloyds. Lawyers say straightforward easy case. Proof undeniable since Lloyds actually admitted being liable, giving full refund and compensation. However, when it came to larger sum, they deny liability! IDIOTS! In other words, the disabled person did not know what he was signing, except when the larger sums (and more complicated forms) were involved. I regret the accusations about the FO being corrupt ALSO, would appear to have some foundation in fact. Further, how could the FO not make some genuine mistakes when Lloyds offical complaints alone arrive at the FI at MORE THAN ONE EVERY TWO MINUTES? !!!!!!!!

[mcgrath703]

I complained about my Bank, the adjudicator wrote to BANK and said she did not believe myself or my wife transferred funds from our personal account to our business accounts. She asked them produce evidence or she would uphold our complaint. She was taken off case a new adjudicator took over and ignored the lady's request for info. He turned DOWN our complaint because the bank did not give the fos info. A year earlier the Bank had investigated the complaint. They had no vouchers or notes to say they had authority to transfer funds over a 3 yr period. The fos did not receive this info off the Bank. They purposely did not disclose this info. I forwarded this to the Fos and I was told because the final decision was made. There was nothing they could do. I asked if there were ever any decisions or final decisions ever reviewed. The fos has said they have but did not record the figures. THE FOS ARE A JOKE. There is no where else to go except court. Complained to the Fos Independent assessor who only look at the way the complaint was dealt with. Not the facts of the complaint. Beware the fos use up valuable time. You have 6ys to take your Bank to court if they have done something wrong. They take an age to answer your complaint. The fos do the same. Seek legal advice as soon as possible and beware the legal system is as bad as the fos. Choose a Solicitor who expertise is Banking. Email every thing that has been discussed. Make sure the Solicitor writes to you with what he has told you and what he or she intends to do. I can give you £1,000,000 reasons why you should do this. BE CAREFULL WORDS CANT BE PROVEN IN COURT

[SabreSheep]

for payments made/taken under a mistake (In fact or in law) you have 6 years from when you discovered or were reasonably expected to discover the mistake.

[BUTTERCUP7]

we have a complaint in at the FO.

 

it started in October 2013

 

then we got an email in april saying our case was removed from the assessor and passed to another person!

 

no reason was given then the 'new person' took it and within a week they wrote and dismissed us.

 

we have since put it to the proper adjudicator.

 

we are still waiting.

 

should we make a complaint about all this to IA? independent assessor.

 

will it slow our case down? if so, we dont mind as we need more time with the problem we have with a buy to let issue.

 

thank you

[mcgrath703]

I received a reply from the Fos with the words Where there incomplete evidence. After doing some research on 3300 Final decisions I found over 25% had the same wording. Has anyone else received a final reply with these words included

I for one am utterly disgusted in the way FOS has dealt with valid complaints I have sent to them.

 

They are exceptionally happy to accept illegible application forms as concrete proof the a DCA may continue to hunt one without mercy or without challenge.

 

They also told me that once a bank is "satisfied" that it is correct about a debt then a debt is no longer considered in dispute, just because a debtor considers it to be so. This is plain silly, utterly biased in favour of the lender and outrageous.

 

All this flies in the face of OFT guidelines and the law and MUST be stopped.

 

FOS is clearly acting over and above their remit as an impartial (lol) body.

 

They will "impartially" listen to your many detailed complaints and then smugly tell you that a DCA is acting quite properly/professionally in line with the internal collection procedures; i.e. ringing you against your wishes at all hours and writing baloney to you on a regular basis. They will tell you that they are NOT a legal body but they will tell you that a shark is legally- entitled to pursue you with nothing more than an unreadable application form for proof of an alleged agreement- a worthless form that may or may NOT have been accepted many years ago.

 

They have taken the side on banks and aggressive DCAs and this can only harm millions of ordinary consumers.

 

I cannot express my revulsion for this coterie. I hope that even more whistleblowers come out and expose them for what they are – a banker puppet!

 

My advice is to recreate an A4 application form that is illegible (the harder to read the better). Then roll over it with a muddy car tyre. Next send a red-letter demand to some DCA manager for a million quid and when they refuse to pay you tell them to grumble to FOS.

Now if FOS is consistent they will impartially examine the muddy application form and tell the DCA gaffer that they cannot help them as a valid and enforceable agreement obviously exists......

 

Jeez - don’t get me going on this lot...........

 

Chocolate teapots are more use to consumers.

[dx100uk]

I received a reply from the Fos with the words Where there incomplete evidence. After doing some research on 3300 Final decisions I found over 25% had the same wording. Has anyone else received a final reply with these words included

 

 

 

 

better you start a new thread or keep to your own one rather than keep randomly spamming every fos thread on cag.

 

 

dx

[citizenB]

McGrath, can you provide more information please - the purpose of your post isn't quite clear ? What was the reason for your research ?

[parity4all]

I received a reply from the Fos with the words Where there incomplete evidence. After doing some research on 3300 Final decisions I found over 25% had the same wording. Has anyone else received a final reply with these words included

 

Adjudicators/ombudsman use template letters. So you will see the same wording across many replies and decisions. Adjudicators have targets to meet. You will not hear from them for ages, then suddenly a string of emails/letters with words like "after carefully reviewing the file, I have concluded..".

 

these letters/emails will attempt to shake off much of the complaint, by picking out certain points saying:

 

1) it wasn't something we investigated" ;

2) it's not within the FOS remit/jurisdiction",

3) you did not raise the issue at the start of the complaint (even when the adjudicator has clearly investigated it for months)

4) the business hasn't had the opportunity to investigate this part, so you need to raise it with the business first.

(bear in mind that for issues encountered with the business while the complaint is ongoing at fos. Adjudicator can incorporate these 'fresh' concerns to your complaint with the consent of the business. Adjudicator will tell you this will speed things up. I beg to differ. In my case, it didn't make the slightest difference. In fact it complicated things. Best to go through the usual procedure, and make complaint to bank/business even if it means waiting eight weeks. At least it will mean the complaints are kept separate, and the adjudicator cannot try and do a fast one by offering you compensation to close off both complaints with one strike.)

 

I think fos works in a very ad-hoc manner. Manager routinely go through complaint statistics. Senior managers (SM) do the same. SM put pressure on manager when targets are off, they in turn go after adjudicators. Adjudicators start 'reviewing' complaints. Due to the pressure to close off cases, evidence is missed, facts muddled-up, letters look the same.

Yep. you couldn't make it up. (well, if you are the FOS, you could)

[Old Cogger]

Quangos they are money/jobs for the boys = the way this non democratic government works - i.e. mis-use of public funds comes to mind.

[mightymouse_69]

Quangos they are money/jobs for the boys = the way this non democratic government works - i.e. mis-use of public funds comes to mind.

 

FOS doesn't have access to public funds.

[Old Cogger]

you get the drift quango = bankers pay their wages??????????????????????????????????????????/

[Old Cogger]

The levy:-

 

All businesses covered by the ombudsman service pay a levy to contribute to our costs. The amount of levy that each individual business has to pay can range from around £100 a year for a small firm of financial advisers to over £300,000 for a high-street bank or major insurance company.

 

Where a business has had no formal complaints referred to the ombudsman service, the levy is still payable. This is because all businesses benefit from the increased consumer confidence that the ombudsman brings.

 

And the ombudsman service's funding covers much more than our work settling cases. We carry out a wide range of complaints-prevention work, aimed at helping to stop problems turning into full-blown disputes.

 

For example, we publish our regular newsletter ombudsman news, our online technical resource, and our series of factsheets for consumers and guides for businesses. And we carry out an extensive outreach programme aimed both at consumers and businesses.