Barclaycard decline then uphold complaint.

[paulwlton]

I've decided not to accept the offer and want a decision now from an ombudsman.

 

I rang BC Friday and they admitted that they failed to respond to my letter of complaint.???

 

PW

[BankFodder]

I doubt very much that they forgot anything. I'm quite sure that it is just part of their game of delaying, obstructing and frustrating the procedure.

 

They want to win – and they don't care how they do it.

[paulwlton]

The Ombudsman has backed the adjudicators descision and confirmed that my "complaint isn't one we can look into"

 

The Ombudsman states - "Under DISP Rules complaint-handling isn't something which is regulated in its own right".......what the hell is she on about???

 

So banks are allowed to treat customers unfairly as long as its under the umbrella of a "complaint"

 

Paul

[mightymouse_69]

The Ombudsman has backed the adjudicators descision and confirmed that my "complaint isn't one we can look into"

 

The Ombudsman states - "Under DISP Rules complaint-handling isn't something which is regulated in its own right".......what the hell is she on about???

 

So banks are allowed to treat customers unfairly as long as its under the umbrella of a "complaint"

 

Paul

 

The FOS can only look into certain complaints - namely, those categorised as regulated activites. It can look into other issues - such as poor customer service, but only if it comes alongside a complaint about a regulated activity.

 

A complaint to try and recover fees paid to a CMC would probably fail anyway - whether it was considered by FOS or a court. Barclaycard didn't force you to use the CMC. If you were unhappy with their initial response, you had an option to challenge it for free... i.e go straight to FOS.

 

The best hope one has is that the business makes a goodwill offer.

[paulwlton]

The FOS can only look into certain complaints - namely, those categorised as regulated activites. It can look into other issues - such as poor customer service, but only if it comes alongside a complaint about a regulated activity.

 

A complaint to try and recover fees paid to a CMC would probably fail anyway - whether it was considered by FOS or a court. Barclaycard didn't force you to use the CMC. If you were unhappy with their initial response, you had an option to challenge it for free... i.e go straight to FOS.

 

The best hope one has is that the business makes a goodwill offer.

 

What if a customer trusts the bank and therefore believes the initial decision is the correct one??

 

Don't you think BC should have the decency to answer my letter wherein i ask - the reason they initially reject then uphold my complaint ??

[BankFodder]

I don't find that this decision is at all surprising.

 

I have already pointed out in this thread - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?445865-Barclaycard-decline-then-uphold-complaint.&p=4735915&viewfull=1#post4735915 and elsewhere that the FOS does not have the power to make decisions on issues which are more properly under COBS or BCOBS.

 

As you know from our own conversations, I consider that the approach to the FOS was a waste of time

 

You say

… banks are allowed to treat customers unfairly…

but actually this is not correct. Under the FCA regs they are not allowed to treat customers unfairly. However you didn't try to invoke the FCA regulations. You went looking for a solution which some arbitrator considers was fair to both sides. You shouldn't be surprised at the result.

 

Other than having wasted a year of your time, the route to a COBS/BCOBS solution is still available to you if you're prepared to go the County Court route.

[paulwlton]

I don't find that this decision is at all surprising.

 

I have already pointed out in this thread - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?445865-Barclaycard-decline-then-uphold-complaint.&p=4735915&viewfull=1#post4735915 and elsewhere that the FOS does not have the power to make decisions on issues which are more properly under COBS or BCOBS.

 

As you know from our own conversations, I consider that the approach to the FOS was a waste of time

 

You say but actually this is not correct. Under the FCA regs they are not allowed to treat customers unfairly. However you didn't try to invoke the FCA regulations. You went looking for a solution which some arbitrator considers was fair to both sides. You shouldn't be surprised at the result.

 

Other than having wasted a year of your time, the route to a COBS/BCOBS solution is still available to you if you're prepared to go the County Court route.

 

 

I am prepared to go down the CC route and will consider doing so in the next few days.

[mightymouse_69]

I am prepared to go down the CC route and will consider doing so in the next few days.

 

I'd be cautious.

 

Barclaycard will basically point out that your claim is essentially a claim for costs. Costs which were incurred by you, of your own freewill. They'll explain that no attempt was made to mitigate the costs, for example, by using the recommended channels of appeal when they gave the initial response to your complaint.

 

They'll also explain that they were within their rights to reject your complaint at first. Most big businesses - and Barclaycard should be no exception - have changed the way they look at complaints a great deal in the past few years. This is because they have learned lessons from complaints which have be decided previously, usually by the FOS. As time has gone on, approaches to certain cases have been developed. A complaint which could have been quite reasonably rejected a few years ago may now be upheld today given the approaches formulated.

 

Of course, it is your choice - but just make sure you get some decent advice beforehand.