Financial ombudsman comes under fire as insider reveals litany of bad practices

[passedhelp]

Also in my case, the evidence was ignored or misdirected, proof of the Halifax failing to comply with The Banking Code, FSA good business practise, Data Protection Act, ignoring a Court Order, were not only not considered but the FSO refuse to explain why so, they also misdirected evidence and even contradicted proven facts, the Halifax claiming mortgage arrears and pursued same for six years, finally admitting they did not exist and only showed to be owed due to a printing error on their part, it then took them a further 27 months to provide a correction to their error which included debiting all their Costs to my account which as I refused to pay them were then claimed as arrears, NONE of these points were addressed by the FOS who refuse to respond to any requests asking why so ?. charged with failing to provide the required care and attention to the evidence supplied the adjudicator refuses to examine my complaints. The FOS is for most consumers a total waste of time.

[Ibsys]

Also in my case, the evidence was ignored or misdirected, proof of the Halifax failing to comply with The Banking Code, FSA good business practise, Data Protection Act, ignoring a Court Order, were not only not considered but the FSO refuse to explain why so, they also misdirected evidence and even contradicted proven facts, the Halifax claiming mortgage arrears and pursued same for six years, finally admitting they did not exist and only showed to be owed due to a printing error on their part, it then took them a further 27 months to provide a correction to their error which included debiting all their Costs to my account which as I refused to pay them were then claimed as arrears, NONE of these points were addressed by the FOS who refuse to respond to any requests asking why so ?. charged with failing to provide the required care and attention to the evidence supplied the adjudicator refuses to examine my complaints. The FOS is for most consumers a total waste of time.

 

I have read and written for a friend about a mortgage case which the FOS has taken 2 1/2 years to complete. I have proved the law has been broken, the financial consequenses of the lenders/solicitors actions, all backed up with evidence and the FOS said the bank had done nothing wrong. The FOS refuse to state what evidence and law they relied upon and refuse to state how they reached their decision. I also questioned what standards they use and if it is less than that of the judiciary and they refuse to answer. Looking at statistics I see that they find in favor of the comsumer 94% of the time in PPIs and only 38% in mortgages and other cases. PPIs are easy and can be cleared quickly and the FOS get £555 per case to decide it. More complex cases get the same money so to cut down costs, standard letters are used and for £555 an adjudicator cannot possibly look at evidence so side with their employers, the banks! It is a total conspiracy to stitch up the comsumer in the knowledge that most consumers cannot afford to go to court.

[rdm2006]

Also in my case, the evidence was ignored or misdirected, proof of the Halifax failing to comply with The Banking Code, FSA good business practise, Data Protection Act, ignoring a Court Order, were not only not considered but the FSO refuse to explain why so, they also misdirected evidence and even contradicted proven facts, the Halifax claiming mortgage arrears and pursued same for six years, finally admitting they did not exist and only showed to be owed due to a printing error on their part, it then took them a further 27 months to provide a correction to their error which included debiting all their Costs to my account which as I refused to pay them were then claimed as arrears, NONE of these points were addressed by the FOS who refuse to respond to any requests asking why so ?. charged with failing to provide the required care and attention to the evidence supplied the adjudicator refuses to examine my complaints. The FOS is for most consumers a total waste of time.

 

I have read and written for a friend about a mortgage case which the FOS has taken 2 1/2 years to complete. I have proved the law has been broken, the financial consequenses of the lenders/solicitors actions, all backed up with evidence and the FOS said the bank had done nothing wrong. The FOS refuse to state what evidence and law they relied upon and refuse to state how they reached their decision. I also questioned what standards they use and if it is less than that of the judiciary and they refuse to answer. Looking at statistics I see that they find in favor of the comsumer 94% of the time in PPIs and only 38% in mortgages and other cases. PPIs are easy and can be cleared quickly and the FOS get £555 per case to decide it. More complex cases get the same money so to cut down costs, standard letters are used and for £555 an adjudicator cannot possibly look at evidence so side with their employers, the banks! It is a total conspiracy to stitch up the comsumer in the knowledge that most consumers cannot afford to go to court.

 

 

We should be taking these complaints to our MP's and insist questions are asked in the "House"

[passedhelp]

Re asked in the House - Does anyone know one who would do this,

MP`s rules only allow them to act for their own constituents and many appear to have been working the system re two houses.

I started to email facts to all 600 MPs listed, gave up after a couple of hundred as only half a dozen responded.

 

All those that should care have been given details of the Halifax`s criminal methods of Banking.

Tony Blair PM passed my complaints to H.M.Treasury who advise they cannot interfere with the workings of the FOS.

Gordon Brown PM wasn`t interested, then appointed the Halifax CEO as his advisor.

David Cameron MP wasn`t interested that the Halifax given taxpayers money, ignored the Protective Codes and the Law of the Land.

Lord Hunt reported on the failure of the FOS but didn`t respond to the list of criminal actions I sent him.

 

The OFT don`t get involved in individuals complaints.

The ASA do not think the Halifax are misleading the public by advertising they comply with the Banking Codes requirements when I have proof they do not do this.

The Trustees of The Banking Code state they do not police their own Code, is the responsibility of the FOS and are not concerned the FOS are not ensuring their Code is complied with.

The FSA "good business practise" - do not police their own own Code for individuals complaints, the FOS do this for them and again are not concerned when they are shown they do not, as they can`t interfere with the FOS.

The Halifax failed to comply with a request as made under The Data Protection Act and totally ignored a Lawful Court Order, the FOS refuse to respond to questions as to why this was not addressed by them.

The papers and Watchdog did not reply, Max Clifford said not his domain, everyone who should know the Halifax operate in a Criminal manner have been informed and not interested in doing anything about it.

The Chairman of the Halifax passed my list of their Criminal actions to their Complaints Dept then forwarded me their response -"as far as we are concerned the matter is closed" then responded further by saying any other letters from me would be ignored.

Various CEO`s of the Halifax respond as above - "the matter is closed"

Latest one from a letter addressed to Stephen Hester, the man who has just paid the FSA £3million pounds for the Halifax treating their customers badly, one of whom is myself on whose back the FSA has benefitted, is not a response from him but one from the RBS Customer Care Dept returning my list of complaints stating the RBS is not part of the Halifax Group -very funny lets LOL.

 

All I did was refuse to pay claimed Mortgage Arrears until proven to be owed, the Halifax took 24 months to provide their first ever response to my repeated protestations but not before they had Summonsed for Repossession.

Spent a further 48 months supplying false accountancy proving I owed the money, then after 6 years of costs/stress said it had all been a mistake through a printing error on their part and that the £2609 proven to be owing was actually £260.

Another 27 months passed before they made an offer of correction, which was a credit in hindsight of misclaimed demands and the debitting of all their Costs to my Account.

They then re-Summonsed claiming these unpaid Costs as Arrears together with the unentitled to portion of the 100% increases to monthly demands, increased portions which was agreed I did not need to pay until claimed arrears were proven.

After 9 years of stress, because they would not correct their error in any manner other than one that ensured they were not a penny out of pocket and on the fact that "Arrears are the failure to pay amounts demanded, irrespective of whether these amounts are correct or not"

I submitted to repossession where they kindly debitted my £23k mortgage with additional Costs of £21.5k.

 

I repeatedly and publicly state that the Halifax plc are a Bank that operates in a Criminal Manner, knowing that they will not take any action to prevent me stating this as I can prove it to be the truth.

 

That The Cabinet and H.M.Treasury have been given details that it is now funding a Criminally operating Bank with taxpayers money.

 

10 years of being pursued for money not in fact owed and another 10 years of trying to get them to correct their error with Equity.

 

hence -"passedhelp"

[Ibsys]

We should be taking these complaints to our MP's and insist questions are asked in the "House"

 

I was reading the other day, and I will find it again, where there was an MP asking a Minister in a Parliamentary debate about the FOS and there being no form of appeal where decisions are inherently wrong with no basis. Amongst other things. Looking what we have on this thread, could I suggest we get together and approach this MP and try and get the support of the woman who was reported in the Times where she opened up to the reporter about what realy happens.

[passedhelp]

am willing to try anything, but I do know that MP`s are only allowed to act on behalf of their own constituents.

The FOS responded more in a manner expected from the Halifax`s Counsel, contradicting, misquoting and misdirecting evidence, I have enough bullets to shoot them down just nobody to fire the gun. let me know how your enquiries get on.

[rdm2006]

Passed help post 129 sounds very similar to the fun (not) that I have been having with HSBC.

 

I am awaiting to hear from legal aid then the real fun will start.

 

As far as FOS is concerned - what is the point of having an intermediary to reduce court actions when they are not "required" to take laws into consideration????

 

beats me

[Ibsys]

am willing to try anything, but I do know that MP`s are only allowed to act on behalf of their own constituents.

The FOS responded more in a manner expected from the Halifax`s Counsel, contradicting, misquoting and misdirecting evidence, I have enough bullets to shoot them down just nobody to fire the gun. let me know how your enquiries get on.

 

Will post all information. I have a problem of my own involving Lloyds but I have friends who have a serious problem but the FOS has disregarded the law and evidence in both cases. It would be nice to sink the FOS as they are bias and serve no good purpose apart from PPIs which keep the figures going. Consumers need justice as if shouldn't be the preserve of the rich.

[passedhelp]

Legal Aid - don`t wish to be a damp squid just don`t get your hopes up,

 

been there with one who all he had to do was make the Halifax obey a Court Order and respond to an Independent Audit, instead he dragged it out for two years then withdrew his services just days before the repo hearing, I sued him via l/aid and another incompetent solcr who dumped my case on to a newly qualified junior and messed it all up, the Office for the Supervision of Solictors stated the first could withdraw his services as it was a "professional judgement" and they could not question this, the 2nd was ordered to pay me £300 for losing me my case, they are only in it to make as much money as they can and the longer they drag it out the more they make.

 

you can look forward to months/years of none productive stress as they can`t do anything until the Banks answer their letters and the Halifax`s norm was an average of 3 months a time.

 

And when you give up so you can get on with your life, you`ll be debitted with the Banks Costs.

 

You are in a No Win No Win situation - pay them even if you don`t actually owe it - cheaper in the long run.

 

Cost me into double six figures to not pay £2609 I didn`t owe.

[rdm2006]

Legal Aid - don`t wish to be a damp squid just don`t get your hopes up,

 

been there with one who all he had to do was make the Halifax obey a Court Order and respond to an Independent Audit, instead he dragged it out for two years then withdrew his services just days before the repo hearing, I sued him via l/aid and another incompetent solcr who dumped my case on to a newly qualified junior and messed it all up, the Office for the Supervision of Solictors stated the first could withdraw his services as it was a "professional judgement" and they could not question this, the 2nd was ordered to pay me £300 for losing me my case, they are only in it to make as much money as they can and the longer they drag it out the more they make.

 

you can look forward to months/years of none productive stress as they can`t do anything until the Banks answer their letters and the Halifax`s norm was an average of 3 months a time.

 

And when you give up so you can get on with your life, you`ll be debitted with the Banks Costs.

 

You are in a No Win No Win situation - pay them even if you don`t actually owe it - cheaper in the long run.1. Not a chance i'd go to jail first 2 not all sols are that bad. I am in staffordshire and you are next door in cheshire which sols did you use?

 

Cost me into double six figures to not pay £2609 I didn`t owe.

 

I take it you have an indemnity clause saying that they can pass all court costs to you for ANY case involving your mortgage (even if its their fault)

 

if so you should complain to FSA about that clause being unfair, I did, and if enough people do it they can stop the use of it

Edited June 17, 2011 by rdm2006

[passedhelp]

First I have ever heard of such a clause, will look into it and thanks, surely goes against common justice.

agreed not all Solcrs but it is a lottery which sort you get, one in Stockport the 2nd in Hanley, not prudent to name them but I can tell you if its the one you are using if you give a name, mine began with D.

[rdm2006]

Hanley? you are close to me lol

 

my sol is close to manchester

 

 

Sols beginning with a D? would that be in a street named piccadilly ?

[££fornothing]

Is it any wonder the FOS are under the strain. The amount of worthless complaints they get are unbelievable.We live in a world were consumers continue to want money for nothing. I work in the finance industry anda customer wanted £1000 compensation because we called him out of hours. Do me a favour. I have no doubt that some cases will have experienced genuine bad customer service but the few badapples are spoiling the cart. Just look at the financial mess the insurance industry is in from over inflated claimsand personal injury claims. Insurance companies in this counrty are losing money hand over fist and I personally have to pay an extra £50 car insurance every year because some twonk claims for personal injury in a 2mph collision.

[rdm2006]

Like you said the FEW spoil it for the many so its not everyone is it..............

[theghost]

The FOS is meant to be the place of last resort after going via the original company is it not? Yet I see lots of people being told to go to them as soon as they have an issue - presumably they get batted back and told to go back to the original company.

 

On top of that there are lots of spurious claims as mentioned above.

[caro]

Like many people I've had texts, phone calls and emails from companies telling me I can claim money for the accident I had. I don't know how they know about this accident because I sure don't know about it! There's a whole industry out there encouraging people to make claims for little or no reason. Is it any wonder that some are tempted when times are hard. If they have a genuine claim then that's what we pay insurance for anyway, and if companies don't behave as they should then people should exercise their rights.

[Ibsys]

Is it any wonder the FOS are under the strain. The amount of worthless complaints they get are unbelievable.We live in a world were consumers continue to want money for nothing. I work in the finance industry anda customer wanted £1000 compensation because we called him out of hours. Do me a favour. I have no doubt that some cases will have experienced genuine bad customer service but the few badapples are spoiling the cart. Just look at the financial mess the insurance industry is in from over inflated claimsand personal injury claims. Insurance companies in this counrty are losing money hand over fist and I personally have to pay an extra £50 car insurance every year because some twonk claims for personal injury in a 2mph collision.

 

Something for nothing....... Banks want something for nothing. When you go to the bank for a loan, what they give you? Nothing. The loan is created by your signature on a document. The account is created on a computer screen and credited with the amount of the loan. The borrower agrees to pay a sum in installments plus interest but does the money exist? NO It is merely a credit and the ££££££ are created from nothing. It is called the FRACTIOAL RESERVE SYSTEM where banks can lend NINE TIMES the amount of money they have on deposit in the bank. Go into your bank and ask the Manager "does this bank create money from nothing?" and they will say oh no. I was chucked off Radio Lincolnshire for saying this about the Fractional Reserve System and money creation.Coming back to the FOS, they are only there to protect the banks. If they didn't the whole system would be changed and the FOS would be finished!

[laineynic]

But there again there are thousands plus who go the the FOS because the attitudes of the financial sector treats there customers apallingly. Charges for this that and the other if the bank sorted out your compaint in a reasonable manner you wouldn't need the FOS.

[AuntieP]

error

[BankFodder]

More proof that the banks have nothing but contempt for the FOS and merely use it as a way of placing further obstacles in the way of the legitimate complaints of their customers

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?336075-Banks-and-insurers-take-hard-line-on-complaints-in-bid-to-cut-costs

 

Don't expect honest dealing from your bank. They have no morality whatsoever

[joeabf9]

Feb 2009 made initial complaint to FOS. August 2010 had to write a letter of complaint to the Chief Ombudsman to get her and her staff to " get their finger' out. Sept 2010 Adjudicator makes her decision (quite a good one, I got lucky) didnt last long, insurers refused it and appealed to the Ombudsman to make her final decision. Enter the Ombudsman and royally f... it up. Feb 2011 I get the final decision which is so full of holes, grey areas you name it, the insurers involved are running rings around the FOS. Feb 2012 and I am still not settled as the FOS are the most pathetic spineless, toothless tiger, smokescreen, insurance-bank-overall financial services propaganda Oxygen Thief - Waist of Rations in the country!

 

Ive went through the FOS full internal complaints procedure, complaining about the FOS themselves. Even all the way up to the so called Independent Assessor who is again a cheese dick excuse for independent, hmmmmmm how many people at the FOS have actually worked for Insurance companies and banks etc and will go back after their FOS attachment.

 

I have been lied to on several occassions and most recently when the Chief Ombudsman, Lead Ombudsman and deciding ombudsman blatantly lied through thEIr pie holes when I caught them Breaking-Changing-Overruling their own FINAL & LEGALLY BINDING DECISION.

 

TOP TIP FOLKS, BOLLOCKS TO AN FOS COMPLAINT, FIND A LAWYER

[rdm2006]

More proof that the banks have nothing but contempt for the FOS and merely use it as a way of placing further obstacles in the way of the legitimate complaints of their customers

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?336075-Banks-and-insurers-take-hard-line-on-complaints-in-bid-to-cut-costs

 

Don't expect honest dealing from your bank. They have no morality whatsoever

 

 

why am i NOT surprised lol

[rikerone]

This is quite a thread.

 

I just registered to post a similar critical sentiment.

 

My experience of the FOS is: consider it if you've no alternative such as bringing a civil court claim and can wait a long time for a decision.

 

Mine inexplicably took them 18 months plus for a really simple issue.

 

But if you have a good complaint and the compensation involved is material, consider using the courts.

 

The FOS adjudicators are not legally qualified and my experience was they did not properly analyse a complaint into the relevant issues and reach a proper, reasoned decision.

 

The decisions I received didn't adddress much of what I actually complained of and missed the point.

 

It took much longer than a court case would have taken and was of infinitely lower quality compared to the care the average judge devotes to their decision.

 

[edit]

Edited February 24, 2012 by dx100uk
external website edited out sorry - dx

[citizenB]

This is quite a thread.

 

I just registered to post a similar critical sentiment.

 

My experience of the FOS is: consider it if you've no alternative such as bringing a civil court claim and can wait a long time for a decision.

 

Mine inexplicably took them 18 months plus for a really simple issue.

 

But if you have a good complaint and the compensation involved is material, consider using the courts.

 

The FOS adjudicators are not legally qualified and my experience was they did not properly analyse a complaint into the relevant issues and reach a proper, reasoned decision.

 

The decisions I received didn't adddress much of what I actually complained of and missed the point.

 

It took much longer than a court case would have taken and was of infinitely lower quality compared to the care the average judge devotes to their decision.

 

[edit]

 

Yes, you certainly have to stand your ground with the FOS. The key to an earliesh resolution is a well thought out complaint in the initial stages - one where they cant claim ambiguity or that insufficient information is given. Then you have to jump up and down on them everytime they attempt to overlook something. Almost certainly you should then push for an ombudsman referral if the adjudicator doesnt come up trumps for you. One thing I do dislike is their attempts to manipulate a settlement by contacting you be telephone. You should insist on communication by email or letter. It wont speed things up by much.. but it is free and you will never be responsible for costs.

 

However, if you have a clear cut case.. then you should really think about using the small claims court. The lower limit will be £10,000 from April 2012 so we hear..

[rdm2006]

Yes, you certainly have to stand your ground with the FOS. The key to an earliesh resolution is a well thought out complaint in the initial stages - one where they cant claim ambiguity or that insufficient information is given. Then you have to jump up and down on them everytime they attempt to overlook something. Almost certainly you should then push for an ombudsman referral if the adjudicator doesnt come up trumps for you. One thing I do dislike is their attempts to manipulate a settlement by contacting you be telephone. You should insist on communication by email or letter. It wont speed things up by much.. but it is free and you will never be responsible for costs.

 

However, if you have a clear cut case.. then you should really think about using the small claims court. The lower limit will be £10,000 from April 2012 so we hear..

 

Yet they say "we look at the facts and not how well they were presented"

 

 

The ombudsman service is a free and informal alternative to going to court. We decide if your complaint is valid by looking at the facts of the case – not at how well you present your complaint. And we prefer to hear from you in your own words.

 

total rubbish