Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
My partner is going through the Ombudsman Service at the moment. His case went to the Adjudicator who initially refused his complaint. When he pointed out the discrepancies in relation to the information she neglected to request and questions that she failed to ask, she then ruled in his favour. When my partner refused to accept the offer from the Company and stated his own terms. She then started asking further questions. When he responded she then reverted back to her original decision and refused his complaint. This was despite realising she was in the wrong in the first place!!
He has now asked for his case to be reviewed by the Ombudsman and now they are asking for any further information!!
Should he highlight the discrepancies and her failings as it was he that pointed out the information she did not ask for and sent her further information which she did not ask for?
the role of the Ombudsman is to review the case with a fresh pair of eyes. They will review the adjudicators files, and any additional information supplied at the time of the complaint, and will make a decision from there. The desicion will comment on the adjudicators decision, and obviously if something is untoward internally, it would be dealt with. Be aware thought, their decision is final, and they will avoid in providing legal advice wherever possible. Hope this helps.
p.s the ombudsman may take a couple of months to respond, so dont worry if you dont hear back straight away.
If you are lucky the Ombudsman will look at the case with fresh eyes, but its not guaranteed. In my case the Ombudsman made the same mistake as the Adjudicator regarding a crucial date that I had specifically pointed out as being incorrect. So no fresh eyes there. He also missed the fact that the Adjudicator had not taken any account of my Aunt's tax situation and allowed the firm to deduct £4000 tax incorrectly, just as the Adjudicator had done. No fresh eyes there either !
But he did spot that the Adjudicator had misunderstood the amount to be invested by £44,000 ( YES £44,000 ) so he was not completely blind, though this did not make him re-consider the compensation offered. There are around 900 Adjudicators, with no minimum qualifications, so many must be inexperienced, you have a better chance of a fair decision with one of the 40-50 Ombudsmen. If your Ombudsman wants further information, he may be looking a bit harder at what the Adjudicator decided, you are lucky.
The Ombudsman's decision is not automatically FINAL, by the way. Its only becomes final and binding on both sides if you accept it. You may reject the fos decision and either continue negotiations with the firm or take them to court. Don't accept the Ombudsman's decision unless you are really sure it is right. There is no going back and no appeal against a decision, even if later information shows it to be flawed.
You can complain to the FOS Service Review Team and if necessary the Independent Assessor, if you think the Adjudicator has behaved incompetently or unfairly.
Wait til you get your decision then complain to the Service Review Team, then the Independent Assessor if necessary. The IA has few real powers but the last holder of the post did make awards for inconvenience due to delays. The new IA may well do the same.
40% (around 600) of the fos staff have been recruited in the last year, according to Natalie Ceeney, FOS Chief Ombudsman, so the levels of inexperience amongst the Adjudicators must be huge. FOS has always been slow, with so many inexperienced staff delays will probably continue.
Perhaps delays will reduce when the FOS recruits its three new Senior Managers all on six figure salaries.
Adjudicator changed her mind!!
Service at the moment. His case went to the Adjudicator who initially refused his complaint. When he pointed out the discrepancies in relation to the information she neglected to request and questions that she failed to ask, she then ruled in his favour. When my partner refused to accept the offer from the Company and stated his own terms. She then started asking further questions. When he responded she then reverted back to her original decision and refused his complaint. This was despite realising she was in the wrong in the first place!!
Reply With Quote