Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'unaccepted'.



More search options

  • 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
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

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


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 1 result

  1. I had very bad experience with FOS at the adjudicator level AND ombudsman level: the adjudicator appeared to have limited legal knowledge related to my complaint and sometimes even came across short of common sense. The ombudsman made her decision on her obviously incorrect assumption which was absolutely false. When I pointed it out a senior level for review, FOS wrote to me saying her mistake was unimportant and thus upheld her decision. I am now thinking to escalate my complaint to the highest level. However, FOS services seemed unacceptable given that they should work for facts and justice. . Now I start to understand why banks these days are so keen to ask you to approach FOS once disputes arisen. The services I have received from FOS was simply an insult to its name. I will tell you how one of the biggest home insurance providers have dealt with me. My lease-hold flat has been insured with it for many years. In the policy renewal documents I received in 2012, 2011, and 2010, the covering letter states 'Please note, any changes to the policy wording are detailed overleaf'. You turn the page around and It is a nearly blank page overleaf without any DETAILED changes, except the wording quoted as below: The above quoted identical wording was certainly from the same template, appearing in all the renewal documents in 2010,2011,and 2012. It is a common sense and an industrial practice that banks would have to highlight the important product information in their correspondence. Plus, the covering letter itself clearly states that any changes will be detailed overleaf, where no detailed information was given. As no document entitled 'Your Home policy document changes' was enclosed with other renewal documents or received separately in 2010,2011, and 2012, I was made genuinely to believe that my policy terms remain unchanged in 2010, 2011, and 2012. In 2015, I had a claim for lease related dispute, which the insurer refused. The insurer said that the cover to lease disputes had been removed since may 2010 according to the renewal documents it sent to me in May 2010. Its allegation was totally untrue. Given that my renewal documents was made under the same template in three years, I believe the template was very likely used to produce some of your renewal documents too. Now, can you please check if the quoted wording appears in your insurance renewal document for year 2010, 2011, and 2012? If so, can you please let me know whether you have received the document ' Your Home policy document changes' attached to your renewal documents? Please help me fight for consumer rights!
×
×
  • Create New...