Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ombudsman'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Categories

  • The Youth Academy
    • The Youth Consumer Service
  • Miscellaneous

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Location

  1. We have a complaint for mis sold ppi against a secured loan we took out in april 2004. It has been in the hands of the FOS since february 2010. We get regular letters from the FOS every 3 months but they all say pretty much the same thing. They keep going on about looking into relationships between the ppi underwriter and the company that provided the loan or the company that sold us the product (presumably because we used a broker to find us a loan). The ppi was added to the loan at the begining and from what ive read on this forum and other places this type of p
  2. Hi everyone, I'm new one here and sorry for my mistakes, english isn't my first language ))) The question is about PPI claim. I moved to UK in 2010 and opened my bank account in Lloyds bank. Because of I didn't speak in English very well the lady in bank sold me Silver account and I didn't know I can have a free one. I knew only this year (2018) in April and I did complain through Resolver and than escalated to Ombudsman. Today I received the answer with refuse. They write it's too late because of it's more than 6 years from opening account date and I should re
  3. Hi Guys I have received a letter of claim from Restons solicitors for a debt bought by Cabot financial. I have made a complaint to the financial ombudsman that the original creditor ‘ a credit card company ‘ refused to deal with several mistakes on my account over a year before Cabot bought the debt and simply told me to deal with the 3rd party debt collectors. The ombudsman said that as they were still the legal owners of the debt they had a duty to deal with me and not pass the buck to the debt collectors. The amount Cabot are claiming is for £1800 when the correct amount a
  4. some may be familiar that i filed an IRL claim with payday loan companies due to my gambling addiction, is this worth pursuing with the ombudsman further after their response? even though mr Lender have agreed to waive all interest and fees it looks as though the ombudsman is saying that they didnt have to do thorough checks as it was my first loan with them
  5. Its time to get rid of these incompetent idiots, I have linked to the HM Government epetitions site. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29619 BTW this was not started by me, everyone please register your support!
  6. This very recent Local Government Ombudsman's decision (released 10 days ago) is another one of importance. In this particular case, a motorist had incurred a penalty charge notice from London Borough of Haringey for wrongful parking. As the contravention was for parking as opposed to a CCTV contravention, she received a Penalty Charge Notice on her car advising that the charge was £130 but if she made payment within 14 days, she would be entitled to a 50% discount bringing the penalty down to £65. She told the council that she could not pay and offered to clear the debt over a
  7. Hi all : a while since I posted. Had rejected PPI claim from LLoyds TSB : upheld by Ombudsman. However since the Plevin case , in the last few days Ive had a letter from the Ombudsman saying Lloyds are now ready to make me an offer and if the Ombudsman don't hear from me by 12th December they will assume this is ok and close the case. I realise it won't be much but never the less its better than nothing as I had given up on it to be honest. Let's wait and see... thanks
  8. This is yet another important decision from the Local Government Ombudsman and one that once again makes clear that if a debtor who is subject to bailiff enforcement considers that he may be 'vulnerable', he must be prepared to provide evidence and outline how his 'vulnerability' affects his ability to deal with the debt. In brief, Mr B's complaint was as follows: Mr B incurred 5 penalty charge notices. He believes that there is a law from the year 1600 that means that he can’t be fined and so can park anywhere. He and his wife both have Blue Badges and he considered that
  9. Devon County County (16 017 119) Decision date: 17th August 2017. Published on the LGO website: 17th November 2017 Vulnerability and bailiff enforcement is a subject that is of great importance and sadly, it is a subject that is very much misunderstood. The LGO have made a number of decisions regarding the 'definition' of vulnerability and the following case is another one where the LGO confirm that a 'vulnerable' debtor must provide evidence to demonstrate how their vulnerability affects their ability to deal with the debt. PS: The following is a shortened copy of the de
  10. The following is a copy of a very recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman. This particular decision is a vitally important one as it refers to the correct procedure that should be followed if an individual has had his goods taken to settle another person's debt. In almost all cases, the goods in question would be a motor vehicle. PS: As the decision is very lengthly, I have split it into two separate posts. London Borough of Ealing (15 016 609) Summary: The Council’s enforcement agents were not at fault when they seized Mr X’s car to recover an outstandi
  11. Hi, I suffered a change in circumstances leading to a significant drop with my salary. I was unable to honour my direct debit to Harlands to cover my gym membership for Xercise4Less so cancelled it without giving them any notice. I find out later that they charged me a £25 admin free as per their terms and conditions. The T&Cs mentioned were news to me as not aware of any. None were presented at the time I took my membership out, and all I signed was the direct debit mandate to authorise them to deduct £9.99 on a monthly basis. I eventually found the T&Cs in
  12. This is a bit complicated, I will try and make it brief"! I moved into this house in 2002, as a single parent. My ex husband came round to see the boys, I asked him if he would call at the phone box on his way home and see how I go about getting the phone connected. The phone was connected instantly, I rang up to set a direct debit up to pay the bills. I have paid every month since September 2002. Letters ect always come addressed to him. I always tell them that he does not live here and never has. I have had different responses, some say they will change the name on th
  13. In the main area of the forum a few days ago, a debate took place regarding a question from a member of the public regarding a letter that he has received from a firm of bailiffs in relation to a Liability Order granted 6 years earlier. The OP wanted to know whether the Liability Order was statute barred (which it is not). Another poster advised that a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman should be considered and that the LGO may likely make a finding of 'maladministration'. The following two LGO decisions would indicate that a complaint to the LGO would not amount to 'maladminist
  14. I've been getting inaccurate roaming data on my Vodafone bills since February. The charges are correct but the itemisation is wrong. The bill lists countries I never went to. I've complained to Vodafone and they said since bill amount is correct there is nothing they can do. They don't control the roaming itemisation (despite me roaming on a Vodafone overseas network). So I filed a complaint with the ombudsman and they agreed with Vodafone. I have been offered £60 as compensation for the inconvenience and the fact I was not informed I had the option to go to the ombudsman but, on the subs
  15. Hello everyone. I submitted my N1 form plus fee and supporting evidence to CCMCC on 25/1/17 regarding Disability Discrimination by The Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman. Having looked on this site, I noticed advice being given regarding P36 rules but in doing so I am now a bit confused. My question is: - If The PHSO make a financial offer to settle and I refuse on the grounds that I am claiming for damages/compensation, which depends entirely on the judges discretion and therefore have no idea what the award could be, will this go against me if t
  16. Hi. I recently submitted a complaint to Clydesdale Bank Plc regarding a credit card I had dating from early 1997. The complaint was declined, and I subsequently complained to the Financial Ombudsman. The good news is that the Ombudsman wrote saying that the Clydesdale were going to make me an "offer". Of course, I'm still waiting, and so to pass the time, I've put together a spreadsheet based on a previous one that I've seen used that calculates the PPI amount plus paid CC interest and then adds on statutory simple 8% interest to both. I guess I wanted to know if my assump
  17. The following LGO decision (which was only released this week) is a vitally important one as it deals with a number of misconceptions and inaccurate advice regarding bailiff enforcement. For instance, this decision addresses the following misconceptions:
  18. Miss-sold a product, received final response from ombudsman whom stated that we were an accidental landlords, the Financial Ombudsman went onto say that the bank, Yorkshire Bank, had missing paper work. They ruled in the favour of the bank, we fought back, by saying it was an unfair process, as they had missing paper work but the financial ombudsman said they had treated us fair, so would not re-open the case. We went back to the ombudsman and stated this was an unfair process, as it was not true and Yorkshire Bank is misleading. The ombudsman stood by the
  19. This is another recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman. This particular case addresses the common subject of single parents and whether or not they may be considered 'vulnerable' for the purposes of bailiff enforcement. There have been a couple of Ombudsman's decisions regarding 'vulnerability' and as in this particular case, the LGO confirm that it is for the debtor to provide evidence as to how their 'vulnerability' affects their ability to pay or deal with the debt. LGO Decision: North Hertfordshire District Council Miss X complains the Council has use
  20. Made a complaint to FOS about paypal. Just got a reply. Seems like the adjudicator's provisional conclusions. He's found paypal had done no wrong. Here's what it says on the bottom of his email: Notice the change in font size, when it says "But If you don't agree with what I’ve said, please let me know why by 6 February 2017. I’ll look at any new information you give me and let you know what I think." I had to really strain my eyes to read this. Surely this is a nudge tactic by the FOS to close-off complaints.
  21. Complaint was about Bank of Ceylon (BOC) United Kingdom (UK) branch. After months of waiting in the assessment queue, my complaint finally ended up on an adjudicator's desk. Adjudicator from what it seems to me went through the file so quickly he missed vital details I'd given on the form and via email. For example, I told the FOS I had further evidence to produce and also to contact me by email, as I was abroad. He ignored both these. He concluded that he had enough to issue a decision. He then attempted to call me on the mobile (even though I said - contact me by email on
  22. I enquired about joining BT in December. While I was still with TT they kept sending me 'don't leave, speak to our loyalty team to see what they can do' messages...so I did. 28 Dec - agreed a new deal 10 Jan - not heard anything so rang them. New deal hasn't been processed because I'd 'missed Jan's payment' (it's DD so it's their fault they didn't take it!) made me pay Jan's bill there on the phone. Couldn't talk about new deal because payment hasn't been processed 12 Jan - they rang me back & agreed new deal. Later that day I received confirmation e
  23. The Local Government Ombudsman's office has just released the following decision. Re: London Borough of Haringey. The complaint 1. The complainant, who I shall call Ms A, complains the Council allowed her to make payment towards an outstanding Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) although it had passed the matter to its enforcement agents (bailiffs), incurring additional costs. What I found 4 The Council issued Ms A a PCN for a parking contravention on 29 September 2015. Ms A did not pay or make formal representations against the PCN so the Council pursued th
  24. I have experience of how bad Consumer Protection is in the UK. Since February 2014 I have had a complaint with - The Ombudsman Service Limited Registered Office: Wilderspool Park, Greenalls Avenue, Warrington, WA4 6HL. Registered in England and Wales. Company registration number: 4351294 VAT registration number: 798 3441 79 - regarding the energy supplier switching process and the criminal activity of Spark Energy in attempting to charge me for gas and or electricity when I have been paying First Utility. The Ombudsman has failed to act, the latest response from them w
  25. The following is another very recent decision from the Local Government Ombudsman on the subject of vulnerability. Once again, the LGO confirm that evidence needs to be provided if a person considers that they may be 'vulnerable'. Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council PS: The following is a short version of the decision. A link to read the full report is at the end of this post. The complaint Mr X complains that the Council has unreasonably taken Council tax enforcement action against him despite his vulnerability. What I found The law says people must p
×
×
  • Create New...