Financial Ombudsman - a recommendation

[notlam]

I can see no reason not to do both; start your court claim and write to the FOS too.

Not because I believe the FOS stand up for us consumers, they wont really; they know which side their bread is buttered - they are financed by the banks and other financial companies, but I do know that it will cost the banks more because they have to pay a fee for each case that is referred to the FOS.

It will also create a bit of a problem for the FOS, which can only add to the pressure the banks are already under.

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[whufc77]

TAKE THAT FINANCIAL OMBUDSMAN!

I am suing my bank due to the excessive/unlawful charges applied to my account since opening! My bank ltsb advised me to see the claim through the BANKING OMBUDSMAN! The case has now got to the stage where both of us have entered into dialog with the local county court. LloydsTSB’s solicitors HAVE BACKED DOWN AND WANT TO DISCUSS A SETTLEMENT!
My question to you Mr. banking ombudsman is why have you been letting the banks rip us (general public) off by implying these unlawful penalties to our accounts! Aren’t you the guys that should be looking after us?
I decided to use the county court small claims track because of the reason behind the question I have just put too you (absolutely no confidence in the banking ombudsman)! The Consumer Action Group has been instrumental in recouping my unlawfully taken penalties. The Consumer Action Group is receiving over 4000 complaints a week compared to your miserly 150ish. I think its about time that you stood up and defended the people, maybe then you will gain some creditability and respect for the governing body that you say you are!
So just to wrap things up, which of the two organizations do you think that the general public has more confidence in?

Look forward to your reply

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[bill-k]

Good One, whufc77 !!!

Further to the recent input from Battleaxe, Mooreda & Notlam, I find myself well corrected with regard to getting my car fixed !! Hell, I ain't gonna argue with you guys !!!

I'm going to book it in to both garages in future. Thanks for putting me straight !!!

Bill.

[bill-k]

Hi, just an earlier email to the FOS, and their reply. For general interest.

Translating:-
Me: "The HMCS suggest I try alternatives first - can you help ?"
FOS: "Sorry, can't help - we have no teeth, and no balls, and as such are a waste of time, effort and space. Bye."


Sent: August 2006
To: External Enquiries
Subject: Query

Hello,

Following recent publicity concerning the OFT’s report on excessive bank charges, I have acted on advice available online, and requested refunds of such charges from several banks. Some of these charges go back more than 6 years (as far back as 1981), but I am told that I can still claim them as they are unlawful.

So far, the indications are that the banks will offer nothing unless and until I issue a County Court claim, but before I do so, should I first ask the Ombudsman to help?

The Court Service seems to suggest this, but I’m not sure if I can use the Ombudsman Service in this case.

Many thanks,

Bill-K.

Dear (Bill-K),

Thank you for contacting the Financial Ombudsman Service. Please quote reference number XXXXXXX in all future correspondence.

Information on our role and the service that we provide is available on our website, www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk



I am afraid that there are some limitations to our powers. One of these is that we do not have a general "policing" function with regard to banks. We do not, for example, have the power to order or recommend that a bank should limit its charges to a particular level or should exercise its discretion in levying charges in particular circumstances.

Unless you tell me that the specific charge is not in line with the normal tariff, I regret that, on the information you have given, your complaint does not appear eligible for investigation under our rules.

Regards

Jo Kebbie
Consumer Consultant

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[bill-k]

...I think I know which garage is going to finish the job, though !!

[Battleaxe]

Bill UK

I posted a thread this morning regarding my response from the FO then rang them, pity the lady on the other end.

All they can do is investigate, they do nothing else and have no powers to award damages or anything. I re-iterated that this why the financial institutions sneer at us and recommend that we take our complaint up with them knowing this.

Might as well take on the rest of them, while I am in this mood. kick enough of them I might get the response I want.

Phillipa

[un1boy]

What is the point of the FOS then? All they can do is investigate - so what if they find that the lenders have acted unlawfully?

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[notlam]

Originally Posted by un1boy

What is the point of the FOS then? All they can do is investigate - so what if they find that the lenders have acted unlawfully?

First, they all gather round and get in a huddle.
Then there's lots of mumbling and tut-tutting.
Then they draw lots to decide who has to ring up the naughty bank.
The boss draws the short straw and tells the temp she/he has to do it.
The unfortunate one gives the bank a damn good telling off (not really, just kidding).
Then they agree to go for a two-hour lunch with their chums from the bank to discuss the "very serious matter".
Then three hours later they come back and are all too sozzled to remember what they were doing before lunch and somehow your letter slips down the back of the filing cabinet - oops!

[bill-k]

Battleaxe - Well done, Phillipa. Yeah - go for the rest of 'em while your axe is still swinging !! I wish I had your spirit.

Un1boy - see notlam's answer !!!

notlam - I reckon that's about spot-on.

[morgan054]

Originally Posted by notlam

I can see no reason not to do both; start your court claim and write to the FOS too.

After my reply from the FOS i would suggest FOS first then court action

Dear Mr Morgan054

Thank you for your email.

It isn't clear why you have sent us this message,(Duh:o ) but I can inform you that we do consider all valid complaints about bank charges and each case is assessed on an individual basis.

However, I will inform you that we can not get involved in any case that has been through or is going through court proceedings.

More information about our service can be found on our website http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/

Yours sincerely

L Williams

And it ONLY took 7 days to reply

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[Dread]

An email to the FO, I wonder if I'll get a reply, what does FO stand for again? Oh yes, I remember now.

Dear sir/madam,

I am writing to inform you of my intention to take Clydesdale Bank PLc to court to recover more than £2,500 (+interest) of illegal charges made to my account over the past six years, I am also researching how I can go back to 1976 when I opened my account. Communication with the bank can only be described as atrocious with two certain cases of Data Protection violations and one possible but unconfirmed. Their behaviour is aggressive, threatening and obstructive to the point where on application for my personal details under the Data Protection Act I was informed that details further back than 2005 would have to be paid for at £5 PER STATEMENT, I had to contact the Information Commissioners Office to compel the bank to provide me with the details I am legally entitled to. Their claim to have misunderstood the Data Protection Act displays either incompetence by the data controller or a cynical means of having consumers go to as much trouble as possible to dissuade them from pursuing their claim. Personally I think it is the latter as I am in touch with, via the Consumer Action Group, a number of people who received the same letter.

Whilst on the subject of the Consumer Action Group, I would like to point out that I have received immense assistance from an organisation set up to assist consumers maintain and defend their rights, a mission the Financial Ombudsman is clearly failing to accomplish. I should not have to be subjected to the humiliation of dealing with a barely literate organisation that on occasion’s fails even to address their letters to me correctly (Clydesdale Bank not the FO).

I trust you will add this email to the many you have already received from Consumer Action Group contributors.

Yours Faithfully

Dread

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[phatram]

Why not forward a copy to your MP?

[Battleaxe]

Will the FO react to the emails?
Will the FO do something?
Will the FO stop sitting on the fence?

All this will be answered in the sands of time.

Writing to your MP might help. Even if you get the same response which I received, you will know what side of the fence your MP lives on. Mine, has interest in several Banking organisations and he is all for punitive charges to dissuade us from going overdrawn. Of course go OD and help swell my pension fund..

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[un1boy]

Originally Posted by Battleaxe

Will the FO react to the emails?
Will the FO do something?
Will the FO stop sitting on the fence?

All this will be answered in the sands of time.

Writing to your MP might help. Even if you get the same response which I received, you will know what side of the fence your MP lives on. Mine, has interest in several Banking organisations and he is all for punitive charges to dissuade us from going overdrawn. Of course go OD and help swell my pension fund..

No way? did he say that?

[Battleaxe]

He didn't tell me to boost his pension fund but yes he said the charges were good idea in these days of rising debt.

See my thread 'I know what my MP thinks'.

[notlam]

Not sure if I was dreaming, but last night, on TV, our nations leader, Mr TB, invited anyone and everyone to let the Government know about any issue that concerns you:

All you need do is text - Talk - Unlawful Bank Charges and send it to 62233

[phatram]

Done

[lorfatz]

Done my email to them.........

Thanks for all the help and support offered by your site. iI really find it invaluable.

[thecornflake]

Originally Posted by Battleaxe

Bill UK

All they can do is investigate, they do nothing else and have no powers to award damages or anything. I re-iterated that this why the financial institutions sneer at us and recommend that we take our complaint up with them knowing this.
Phillipa

Considering the following from the article on the This Is Money website -

...he threatened to make a legal ruling that will force banks to pay back all charges....

Mr Merricks warns that if banks failed to pay back consumers, or if the OFT investigation was lengthy, then he would be forced to weigh in with a ruling that could force banks to reimburse customers.

and even better

Instead, he wants banks to accept that their charges are unfair and refund them when customers complain, rather than resorting to delaying tactics and bargaining over how much they should refund....

...Chief ombudsman Walter Merricks believes that if banks reimburse those customers who are prepared to complain several times, then they should have to pay back money to everyone who makes a claim.

I am thinking about trying to get hold of a more direct and useable quote to this effect that could possibly be added on to the prelim letters. Plus we then continuously hound him/them asking why he hasn't carried through with his threat even the banks are still holding out till the last minute on every single claim. Not to mention the abuse of the court system.

I know it's an empty threat but our complaints would have more of a solid backing if the banks are directly conflicting with what the FO says and if it got a little publicity on this angle it would do no harm.

[kecimot]

Hi I just sent email to FO as well.
I will now fill in small claim against Halifax, regarding approx. £900.00

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales