Taking a bank to court using BCOBS/COBS

[Notymyname]

Hi 

 

Below is my story.

 

Now i am aware that the initial issue is about my mother, but since then i have dealt with the matter with Nationwide as an individual, and it is me who is being lied to, is it possible to take them to the small claims court using BCOBS/COBS to get a judgement on whether they are treating a customer fairly?

 

As you can see they when I made a formal complaint about an individual at Nationwide customer service team, it resulted in him dealing with the complaint about himself.

 

And i have never actually got my complaint answered, as obviously there is a little conflict of interest going on here.

 

The fact the CEO is aware of what has gone on but is too impotent to do anything about it, sums up this disgrace of a firm.

 

 

 

In late 2021 i made a complaint about a Customer Complaints handler we will call Mr. J and the fact he claims Nationwide only issue consent to the FOS looking at a complaint at the time the FOS contact them, as opposed to the reality which is when NBS send the customer a letter issuing referral rights.

 

I also made a complaint about the fact that Mr J had made 2 lies to the Daily Telegraph, and the 2 issues the journalist write about.

 

Hence this complaint was clearly about Mr. J.

 

So the The Director then past my complaint onto Mr. J's colleague to presumably get an impartial answer, but he then told me he know nest to nothing about the case, and then passed the complaint on to Mr J to answer.

 

Below is the letter i have recently sent that Nationwide will not respond to, as it will mean admitting a member of staff has lied as fails to understand at which point Nationwide issue consent to the FOS.

 

Dear ###/ Branch,

 

In relation to our call on 27/1/20, I am sending this letter to raise a complaint about Mr. J, and the provable lies he has recently made. Along with Nationwide’s failure to adhere to BIS PAS 17271-2017. These matters have not been addressed by Nationwide. 

 

May I be clear, by stating this complaint is not about Nationwide’s role in failing to prevent the fraud taking place. It is not about the CHAPS rule I believe Nationwide failed to adhere too. I agree that Nationwide’s legal team and Mr. J have provided answers to these matters.

 

I will add, in September 2021 I emailed the Director to raise a complaint about Mr. J's failings; he kindly got Mr. Mc who is a colleague of Mr. J to look into my complaint.

 

However, that did not happen, as he got Mr. J to look into the complaint about Mr. J.

 

I attach the recording of the call with Mr. Mc here are some comments that stand out. 

 

2-09 - I haven't actually looked at your case in great detail. 

8-17 - It wouldn't best good practice to step in and take this case away from Mr. J

8-29 - Mr. J has my support, i operate on the same level as Mr. J, he has my full support. 

 

Quite obviously that was not the impartial outcome" The Director" anticipated. 

 

However, the comment Mr. Mc made at 5:27, is all I ask of Nationwide. 

 

If there has been an error made we need to acknowledge that accordingly.

 

It should be a source of embarrassment to Nationwide, that Mr. J has been allowed to address the complaint I have a raised about In late 2021 i made a complaint about a Customer Complaints handler we will call Mr. J and the fact he claims Nationwide only issue consent to the FOS looking at a complaint at the time the FOS contact them, as opposed to the reality which is when NBS send the customer a letter issuing referral rights.

I also made a complaint about the fact that Mr J had made 2 lies to the Daily Telegraph, and the 2 issues the journalist write about.

Hence this complaint was clearly about Mr. J.

So, " The Director" then passed my complaint onto Mr. J's colleague to who we will call Mr. Mc to provide an impartial answer, but Mr. Mc then told me he know next to nothing about the case, and then passed the complaint on to Mr J to answer.

Nationwide should have a policy in place for when a complaint is made about their staff; that results in the complaint being dealt with impartially and professionally, with no conflict of interest. To seek an end to this I put my complaint in writing, about the 3 following issues. –

 

 1. Highlighting Mr J’s failure to understand when Nationwide give consent to complainants so they can to take their case to the FOS. Plus his attempt to deceive me, as to how a DISP rule is interpreted. 

 

2. Mr. J lying to Nationwide’s press team, who then forwarded these lies to the Daily Telegraph, with the sole aim of misleading him for the article he wrote in October 2021.

 

3. Nationwide failing to even attempt to adhere to BSI PAS 17271:2017 - Protecting customers from financial harm as a result of fraud or financial abuse. 

 

Quite simply Nationwide washed it hands off my mother within a few days of the fraud taking place. Could Nationwide please answer all the question I have highlighted below in yellow. 

 

Complaint 1. 

Can Nationwide confirm at which point they issue consent to a member, so they can take their complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, is it -

 

 A. On the day Nationwide respond to the complainant, providing them with a letter stating “You have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge – but you must do so within six months of the date of this letter”. As per DISP 1 Annex 3 Part 1.

or 

B. Many months after Nationwide sends a letter which provides with the wording as per DISP 1 Annex 3 Part 1. The complainant puts their complaint in to the Ombudsman. At which point the Financial Ombudsman Service contact Nationwide.  Do Nationwide believe it is at point that they give consent for the Ombudsman to review the case? 

 

This is a simple question, is it A or B?

 

I attach a telephone recording between Mr. J and I, from 07/09/2021, where he states it is B. DISP 2.8.2AR reads, - If a respondent consents to the Ombudsman considering a complaint in accordance with DISP 2.8.2 R (5), the respondent may not withdraw consent. 

 

However, in the world of Mr. J DISP2.8.2AR reads – “If a respondent consents to the Ombudsman.” Please note that he has put a full stop after the word Ombudsman, and then he ignores the rest of the rule.

 

 Therefore, in his mind DISP 2.8.2AR means, he has to provide consent to the Ombudsman, at the time the Ombudsman contacts him.

 

 If you listen to the recording these are the claims Mr. J makes - 

8.25 Mr. J - I'm looking at DISP as we speak now, and i'm looking at that specific point that you're referencing and it says .... 

8.30 Mr. J - If a respondent consents to the Ombudsman. (note the full stop, and ignoring the rest of the rule) 

8.36 Mr. J - All we’ve given you is rights to the Ombudsman. (That is all anyone needs, he does not have to consent many months later) 

8.40 Mr. J - So naturally we need to consent to the Ombudsman reviewing it, we never provided consent to the Ombudsman. 

 

Clearly, it is incorrect for Mr. J to claim that consent is given at the time the FOS contact NBS. In this call, Mr. J has admitted to giving consent “by error”; yet later on in the call, he claims the time Nationwide give consent is at the time the FOS contact him. Both cannot be right. 

 

Could Nationwide please admit that Mr. J's interpretation of DISP 2.8.2AR is incorrect, and that he is meant to read the entire sentence to interpret the rule? 

 

Could nationwide please confirm at which time consent is given to a member to take their complaint to the FOS, Is it as Mr. J claims at the time the FOS contact Nationwide?

 

 Or was it when he provided a letter giving consent? 

 

Complaint 2- Mr. J lying to the Daily Telegraph. I am above to provide is unquestionable evidence, to show the level of deceit Mr. J has gone to, to cover up his previous inhumane handling of this case.

 

I am sure we call all agree that Nationwide should not be lying to the media, and if I prove they have, then Nationwide will admit to this and apologise to myself and Daily Telegraph. 

 

If you could please listen to the phone recording at 6 minutes, as a reminder this call is from 09/09/2021. Thus 2 years 4 months after Mr. J provided a letter consenting to allow my mother to take her case to the FOS. 

 

You will hear that is the first time Mr. J apologises for claiming he gave referral rights “in error”.

 

6.00 Mr. J - So the ones (the referral rights) i issued in the May 2019 letter, the rights provided within that, were provided in error, due to an oversight. 

6-19 Mr. J - Which we naturally apologised for any inconvenience that was caused.

6.23 Me - You havent apologised, this is the first time I’ve heard you apologise. 

6.32 Mr. J - I'm sorry there hasn't been an apology previously For the record, this was the first time I or my mother have spoken to Mr. J; there was no email correspondence after May 22nd 2019, until January 9th 2020 (see below).

 

This was day my mother called the FOS to get an update on the case. Even at this point Mr. J did not apologise for what he claims was an oversight.  #### #### at the Daily Telegraph, wrote an article about my mothers case. 

 

The 2 issues who was interested in was why Nationwide sent a letter to my mother providing consent, to take her case to the FOS, only to withdraw this; and Nationwides failure to adhere to CHAPS. Mr J lied on both issue.

 

 I attach the email chain between Telegraph and NBS's press team, where he asks why Nationwide withdrew consent. 

 

Below is Nationwide's reply - 

 

Further complaints about the matter were subsequently send to Nationwide and in a response a right to raise with FOS was incorrectly mentioned again, for which we apologised at the time. 

 

This claim is a blatant lie. You can hear the phone call where he apologies for the 1st time, this was 2 years and 4 months after the event.

 

 Mr. J knows he never apologised or informed myself or my mother of what he describes as “Nationwides oversight”. The fact that Mr. J has had to resort to lying to the Daily Telegraph about this detail, shows even he knows it is inhumane and wrong allow an elderly lady to believe Nationwide had allowed her to take her complaint to the FOS, only to withdraw consent 7 months later 

 

When I spoke to the #### branch in August 2021, I showed her DISP 2.8.2AR and she said if he apologised right away then it would be fair enough, but the fact he never apologised is not acceptable.

 

 Will Nationwide admit that Mr. J has misled the DT when claiming he apologised at the time? 

 

Will Nationwide admit it falls short of their values to treat an elderly fraud victim in such a way?

 

Mr. J’s other lie to the Daily Telegraph is when he stated – “Mrs H …… was duped into sending money to a different account that had been opened in her son’s name. Therefore, even checking the name would not have prevented the payment being made. 

 

First or all I attach a letter from Humberside Police who, confirms the account was opened in the name of a female who they arrested. (see attached) However, to show you in extreme detail why Mr. J knows this to be a lie. In June 2020 I asked Nationwide via Mr. J to get the name and address of the fraudsters account, as Payment Service Regulation 90 (4) allows. 

 

Now Mr. J being Mr. J, refused to answer the question. Therefore, I had to take my complaint to the FOS, and the FOS forced Mr. J/Nationwide to answer my question. Nevertheless, Mr J/ Nationwide refused to ask Fidor Bank for the details of the account holder.

 

However, clauses 8.303 to 8.305 of FCA - Payment Services and Electronic Money – Our Approach - June 2019 (version 4), show Nationwide are obliged to get this relevant information, with 8.305 specifically outlining cases identical to my mothers. 

 

So, we took the case to the FOS and we won the case. The outcome was Nationwide were told to ask Fidor Bank for the account holders details, and we were awarded £200. (I have refused this award). 

 

But Fidor Bank had now left the UK, and never responded to Mr. J, so he clearly knew he was lying when claiming the fraudster opened the account in the name of “The Son”. So in light of the overwhelming evidence I provide,– Will Nationwide admit, Mr. J has misled the Telegraph by claiming the account was opened in Mrs H, sons name?

 

 In light the account was opened in the name of a female, will Nationwide admit Mr. J has misled the Telegraph by claiming that checking the account name would have stopped the payment going through? Will Nationwide apologise to the Daily Telegraph for misleading them? 

 

Complaint 3 – How have Nationwide adhered to code BIS PAS 17217:2017. 

 

In light of what I have shown above, I do hope someone with integrity at Nationwide will admit there have been serious failings in this case. 

 

Will Nationwide admit it has failed my mother in relation to help they should have offered after the fraud took place, maybe if NBS did then we would not be in this position. BSI PAS 17271:2017 - Protecting customers from financial harm as a result of fraud or financial abuse. 

 

3.1 General principles The organization should deliver a service that: offers a person-centred approach that responds to the needs of each customer;

 

3.3.4 Specialist staff The organization should appoint specific fraud prevention staff, that have specialist knowledge of fraud or financial abuse and can deal with customers who need expert guidance on issues related to financial harm. Note - Customer fraud prevention staff may refer to an individual, or a specialist team, whose specific role is to provide help and support to customers who are at risk from, or have suffered financial harm as a result of, fraud or financial abuse. 

 

6.1 Communicating with customers

6.1.1 Communication plan The organization should devise a communications plan, to ensure that customers are given access to the right information and guidance at the time it is most relevant and useful, in order to enhance their ability to make informed decisions, or challenge situations in which they feel unsure. 

 

8.3 Remedial action 

8.3.1 Objectives Remedial action is used in circumstances where fraud or financial abuse has already resulted in financial harm. 

 

The organization whose customer is the victim of financial harm should take responsibility for the resolution of the claim and see it through to its conclusion.

Organizations whose customer is the suspected perpetrator of fraud or financial abuse should take necessary steps to recover funds; and aid in the identification of the suspect for investigation; identify additional help or support that the customer might need. 

 

My mother spoke to the general complaints team a couple of times, in the few days after the event. 

 

Will Nationwide accept, there has been no service that offers a “person centred approach”, to the fact this was a vulnerable elderly lady who lost her life savings to a fraudster? Will Nationwide accept, there has never been any “specialist staff” to offer “expert guidance” to a customer who suffered financial harm as a result of fraud.

 

Does such a person exists within Nationwide, if so who? Will Nationwide accept, there was never any communication plan, or guidance or help? And will Nationwide accept, they have not “taken responsibility for the resolution of the claim or seen it through to its conclusion”. 

 

Finally, this is from Nationwide’s website in regards to staff speaking up or whistleblowing when they see wrongdoing or misconduct. It should now be clear Mr. J is guilty of both -

 

Encouraging a culture of speaking up We support, promote and encourage our colleagues to speak up whenever they witness or experience actual or potential wrongdoing or misconduct. Our permanent colleagues, temporary workers and third-party suppliers are encouraged to use various channels, both formal and informal, to raise things when they don’t seem right or don’t match our values. 

https://www.nationwide.co.uk/about-us/responsible-business/caring-for-members/operate-with-integrity/

 

 

[Andyorch]

Welcome to the Forum....i have moved your topic to the relevant Forum ........Nationwide.

 

Andy

[mantis shrimp]

Can you explain what the original complaint was all about, please. I am struggling to see the wood for the trees here.

[Notymyname]

Or the simplified version of above is -

 

I have put in a complaint about Mr. J at Nationwide and his provable lies that he told the Daily Telegraph about this case. The Daily Telegraph were solely dealing with me.

 

He has given me false/misleading information as to when Nationwide provide consent to take a case to the FOS, in relation to DISP 2.8.2AR.

 

I as a NBS customer have put this complaint in about him to Joe Garner the CEO, Mr Garner then got this persons colleague to look into the matter .... though he didn't he just gave it to the person i'm complaining about to deal with.

 

Obviously this person is not going to look into a complaint about himself so he doesnt.

 

Thus it is impossible to put in a complaint to Nationwide about a member of staff, as in this case they deal with it themselves.

 

Thus as Nationwides complaint policy is in breach of PRIN "The Banking Principles", or just these ones, i am looking to get a judgement to see if this is in breach of PRIN/BCOBS/COBS.

 

1 Integrity	A firm must conduct its business with integrity.
2 Skill, care and diligence	A firm must conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence.
6 Customers' interests	A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly.
7 Communications with clients	A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading.
8 Conflicts of interest	A firm must manage conflicts of interest fairly, both between itself and its customers and between a customer and another client.
9 Customers: relationships of trust	A firm must take reasonable care to ensure the suitability of its advice and discretionary decisions for any customer who is entitled to rely upon its judgment.