Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you do NOT need to pay it and anyway that would not remove the ccj, its there on your file paid or not for 6yrs, a paid ccj even with a cert of satisfaction is as bad as a non paid one.   the ONLY way to remove it is to set it aside.   sadly you the very worst thing you could have done with ANY debt on your credit file or not that you last used or paid or wrote about to the debt owner in the last 7 yrs....you ran away,,,moved without informing the debt owner of your correct and current address.   erudio and drydens are masters at doing backdoor ccj's. they are ofcourse totally wrong that the defaulted date is the sb date...well not when your last written/signed ack of the debt was more than 6yrs before the claimform date.   now how do you remove it....go read that thread ...carefullly then comeback here and lets see if you understand how.   dx  
    • Thanks, having to move house and discovered this. It's causing a nightmare in trying to rent somewhere and mortgage was also refused by the bank.    Shortly after requesting info I got a warrant in the post from bailifs. Managed to halt that and pause any action till I get key dates to try and get this removed.   Not wanting to avoid paying it, just need the CCJ gone.   Appreciate your help. Will read fully although I am not great with law.
    • Write the letter. It's important that you put this in writing so that you have a paper trail. Send the letter by recorded first class delivery. Explain that because of the defect in the bundle which has manifested itself within 30 days – always refer to the bundle – you are now rejecting it under the consumer rights act 2015 and that you require a refund and you want to know what their arrangements will be for providing you with this. You can also send this by email – but do it straight away. This reserves your rights and after that you have some flexibility as to how you want to act. I understand that they are uncooperative. No surprises. Don't imagine either that they will be fazed by your letter – but the important thing is that you are able to show that you are asserting your rights. After that, they are acting unlawfully We will help you make a claim against them and I suppose that will involve threatening to sue them and maybe even going on to sue them. You will find interesting and you will acquire some transferable skills which will enable you to sue anybody else who gets in your way with a degree of confidence. However, it might be a good idea to mitigate your loss and I would suggest that you accept the money that they have put on the table but make sure that they understand that you are accepting it and you are happy with it and you consider that they still owe you the outstanding £70. If you are asked to sign anything then you should decline and then we will help you claim for the whole lot. However if they don't ask you to sign for anything, then make sure that they have a letter from you at the same time saying thanks very much do for the £250. You are accepting it but this should not be taken as an indication that you are now relinquishing your claim to the rest of the money. Tell us what you want to do – with you want to take the 250 or whether you want to simply reject the lot and claim for the lot. If you want to take the 250 – which I suggest that you do – and if they will give you the money despite the fact that you are still reserve your rights in respect of the balance, then come back here when you have that money and we will help you with the rest. If they refuse to give you the money unless you agree that it is in full settlement, then that becomes very interesting because it becomes very clear evidence that they are beating their obligations under the consumer rights act – and this gives you even greater leverage over them when you decide to confront them. The advantage of mitigating your loss is that there is less to sue for and that means that your court fees will be less – although you will get these back anyway when you win. Also, because they are only fighting to hang onto £70, they are more likely to put their hands up once they know you're serious. There is absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking the money that is available on the table subject to the reservation which I've indicated above.
    • Yes she might well have sunk the VCS ship, or put it on the rocks as it rehashes old stuff introduces nothing new.
    • Hello BF   As you caught, yes both items (console with digital game download) bought from GAME as an advertised bundle (still got screengrabs of the bundle/ad).   No letter sent but I did actually quote that specific 2015 act when trying to return it in-store. I was scrolling away online looking at consumer advice on my mobile as the manager was testing the console. It fell on the deaf ears of the store manager who wasn't entertaining the return/my query at all. They just kept saying there is nothing technically wrong with the console. I'd question whether the manager even knows about the CRA2015 considering their response/the lack of engagement.   I've not done anything formally but I'll write a letter. The store said I can pick up with customer services. I've went more along the lines of escalating from store to area manager. Their website is quite specific that in-store returns can only be made in-store. I'm awaiting a call from area manager next week but after todays update that they will withhold £70 I'm expecting a similar response.   It cost £250 in total. I traded in an old playstation as part of the deal. £100 trade-in value and £150 by debit card. For clarity I'm not expecting £250 back via debit. But £100 store credit and the £150 debit refunded was my sole expectation.   Thanks very much btw!
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Aviva ignored signs of financial abuse by sibling and supported by FOS


Titchytitch
 Share

Recommended Posts

The ombudsman didn't come back to me for any final additions to add to the case she just made the final decision without talking to me and the adjudicator didn't speak to me once she was getting the initial investigator to get the information from me 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but I thought it was laid out somewhere on the ombudsman's website that they would come to you with a draft decision and invite you to make final comments on it. Have I got that wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I understand that. You said that before. However you are missing the point that I seem to remember that somewhere the ombudsman's process is described and in that description it says that you will be given sight of the draft decision and invited to make any final comments before the decision is finalised.

Have I got that wrong?
If that's correct, then where is that piece of writing please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder I believe its this bit you want 

Taking your complaint further

If you or the business don’t want to accept what we’ve said, you can ask for your case to be referred to an ombudsman.

The ombudsman will then look at all the details of your complaint afresh, and make a final decision. As part of this process the ombudsman may decide to issue a provisional decision which will set out the decision he/she is minded to make on your case. The ombudsman will then ask both parties to make any final representations which he/she will consider before issuing a final decision on your case. 

Once a final decision is issued, you will be asked to confirm by a specified date whether you accept or reject it. If you accept the ombudsman's decision, the business has to do what the ombudsman has told them to do. This might, for example, include making the business pay you compensation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

I see that it simply says that the ombudsman "may decide"….

That's unfortunate. I thought that the ombudsman was obliged to do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but that only happens in the event that the ombudsman has decided to exercise discretion and generate a provisional report.

The asking of both parties to make final representations is predicated on the ombudsman's decision whether or not to generate a provisional report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder ok it's unfortunate thenx

 

@BankFodder I think we were thinking on the lines of the adjudicator didjt look at the complaint afresh she carried on the investigation based off what the initial investigator had been looking at and didn't speak to me but was filtering information through her so wasn't really seen as "afresh"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok well if you are happy with the letter, wait for a few hours for any feedback from the others and then send it recorded delivery and by email as well to the independent assessor email address

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we have to start turning our attention to Aviva.

This thread has gone on a long time and I expect there will be more to add

I think that it will be a good idea to start a new thread.

 

Could you please start a new trade with a brief title

Something like unfair treatment by Aviva in fraudulent insurance application

 

Then if you could start off by giving a very few brief facts. We don't need to go through the whole thing we don't need to to talk about the ombudsman.

You simply need really to talk about the fact that they opened an insurance policy because of a fraudulent application by your brother and that the call handler felt uncomfortable but still approved the application.

And now the result is that they are pursuing you for the recovery of the money which has been stolen by your brother

And that he has now been arrested.

 

Quote some of the findings in the ombudsman decision where are Aviva have given their account of exactly what happened.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way you say that your brother has been arrested. Has he been charge?

Does either his arrest or the charges relate at all to the Aviva insurance fraud or are they simply in respect of the other frauds that he apparently has committed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder email from officer this morning I knew about his arrest as his wife rung me threatening me 

 

Morning, 

 

Just to let you know your brother was arrested last night, i'm unfortunately in court today but a very trusting colleague will interview him and let me know what he says. Ultimately he will be released under investigation or on bail and I will send the file to CPS. I'm hoping his house is also searched for any evidence but the fact he has known he was wanted makes me think he may have gotten rid of anything that might incriminate him. 

 

I will be on my emails all day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bankfodders letter is good.  I will add further posts, but here is what i think so far.

 

Might be possible to add some Insurance regulatory information and also some information on domestic financial abuse.   The FOS are required to consider all relevant information and it appears that they have not done so.  FOS have to follow the FCA rules including ICOBS.

 

FOS staff should be aware of financial abuse and consider whether this was a factor.  Did the Ombdusman ask Aviva about their policies in helping their customers facing domestic financial abuse ?  Did the Ombudsman look into the FOS/FCA policies and procedures in regard to handling a complaint that involved domestic financial abuse ?

 

 

 

WWW.FCA.ORG.UK

One in five women and one in seven men has suffered some form of financial abuse typically at the hands of their partner. Like all domestic abuse it is a...

 

  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Section 3 of this link covers the rules that the FOS are required to follow.

 

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DISP.pdf

 

DISP 3 : Complaint handling Section 3.6 : Determination by the
procedures of the Financial Ombudsman
Ombudsman Service

3.6 Determination by the Ombudsman
Fair and reasonable.....................................................................................................
The Ombudsman will determine a complaint by reference to what is, in his
opinion, fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case.

Section 228 of the Act sets the 'fair and reasonable' test for the Compulsory
Jurisdiction (other than in relation to a relevant complaint within the
meaning of section 404B(3) of the Act) and n DISP 3.6.1 R extends it to the
Voluntary Jurisdiction.
Where a complainant makes complaints against more than one respondent
in respect of connected circumstances, the Ombudsman may determine that
the respondents must contribute towards the overall award in the
proportion that the Ombudsman considers appropriate.
In considering what is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the
case, the Ombudsman will take into account:
(1) relevant:
(a) law and regulations;
(b) regulators' rules, guidance and standards;
(c) codes of practice; and
(2) (where appropriate) what he considers to have been good industry
practice at the relevant time
  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this is very interesting.

It appears that the FOS has a statutory duty. However, it also seems to rely on the ombudsman's own subjective view of what is fair and reasonable and that gives them their let out clause.

On the other hand, it seems that the ombudsman is obliged to make a decision as to what is fair and reasonable based on "all the circumstances" of the case.
That suggests to me that there is a statutory duty to ascertain all the circumstances and if it's correct that the ombudsman hasn't seen the "process" then he is not aware of all the circumstances in which case he is in breach of his duty.

I think that this is very helpful and we will have to find a way to incorporate it into the letter I have suggested above

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ombudsman clearly did not dligently check and consider all of the information that was pertinent to the complaint.

 

I have not even mentioned Aviva's failure under the Data Protection Act.   They allowed a third party to arrange Insurance for someone else, without gaining any consent to process data.

 

Did the Ombudsman obtain call recordings from Aviva, so they could review how the Insurance arrangement was handled, to check that Aviva followed law and regulations ?

 

If the Ombudsman did  not apply the fair and reasonable tests when handling the complaint, they have failed to objectively consider the complaint in the way regulations require.

 

Aviva under FCA handbook Principles for Business states

 

RIN 2.1.1 R 03/01/2018 RP

The Principles

1 Integrity

A firm must conduct its business with integrity.

2 Skill, care and diligence

A firm must conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence

 

This is adding to the point in Bankfodders letter, that the Aviva Sales Advisors instinct was that they were not sure they should issue the policy as they were unsure about meeting with regulatory requirements.  The Ombudsman has then not considered properly whether they have themselves met FCA Fair and Reasonable tests,  reviewing the complaint to ensure they have taken into account

 

(1) relevant:
(a) law and regulations;
(b) regulators' rules, guidance and standards;
(c) codes of practice; and
(2) (where appropriate) what he considers to have been good industry
practice at the relevant time

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

@unclebulgaria67 the investigator only mentioned business file and I believe they have heard the calls as they  said he claimed to be my husband as they concluded the policy was fully controlled by Mr Z

 

She also said their was a litigation case from the subject access again its come to light his details are on the end he said I was driving it supposedly went to trial stage but I have no letters or knowledge and it was being dealt with  solicitors no contact with me again his details used , the adjudicator concluded the investigation based on the litigation case I believe 

 

So none of the information was actually taken into consideration as she would have had this info as I got it in the subject access 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we will incorporate these points in the letter but I think everybody has to accept that a complaint to the independent assessor will have no effect on the decision.

They are very clear that they won't interfere with the decision and the best you might get is some bonbons which are really calculated to make it look as if they are proactive and customer facing.

Still will make a good fist of it – but the best thing now is to attack Aviva directly and on that basis, you should start a new thread in the way that I suggested earlier

  • Thanks 1
  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@BankFodder I've just received some update from the police officer Z gave a prepared statement he was specific of the solicitor he wanted which is a family friend who I don't trust so she has further enquiries to follow :

 

-He claims a verbal agreement was made between me and him and my husband my eldest brother and late father were present this is a lie if this was true why would he need to claim with aviva that he was my husband 

- 2nd he is claiming I have correspondence with aviva where I have signed documents another lie I havent signed anything which leads me to believe he has been forging my signatures 

 

police officer has said she will be speaking to aviva and asking them why this hasn't been classed as fraud and for any info 

 

I have asked the police officer to speak with my husband in her line of enquiries I feel sick to the stomach taht your own can go to this extent 

 

Once her enquiries are in she said she will decide whether it will go to CPS or not 

 

please advise if there's anything else i can do 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@BankFodder have we finished compiling the letter for the independent assessor as deadline is 8th October sorry it completely slipped my mind I know you did one but wanted to tweak it but I didn't get an updated version to send in 

 

thank you 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...