Aviva fraudulently processed my data without authorisation o

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder sure no worries I'm also worried once I reject the FOS decision aviva will start sending default lettershoe do I manage this ?

I have the police coming today too he seems to have done soft searches periodically around March, july20, Dec20 and April 21 to the same companies I think there's over 36 companies 

[BankFodder]

Well I hope that your meeting with the police goes well. You need to keep on emphasising the domestic/economic abuse aspect. This is a kind of trigger phrase for them. Also of course keep on referring to fraud.

I suggest that it would be very useful if you took notes while the meeting was happening.

Although it seems strange, they won't give you access to anything that they prepare as a result of your meeting – so you should take brief notes and then write them up when the police have done so you can remember exactly how the discussion went

[BankFodder]

Also, – in order to avoid getting into a discussion about it, I suggest that you don't mention the fact that you are visiting this forum for advice. They don't like this kind of thing. They don't really know why they don't like it – but they don't like it and to avoid disapproval, I suggest that you don't mention it. It's not relevant anyway.

But of course it's a decision that you make for yourself

[BankFodder]

If you do mention us to them then probably a good idea to point out that we have been encouraging you to go to the police – because then they will feel that we are supportive of them – which we are.

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder I wasn't planning on mentioning this site I was just going to keep to the facts 

 

@BankFodder what are your thoughts re Aviva chasing ne with default letters once I reject decision how will I manage that please x

[BankFodder]

Well there's not much that you are going to go to do about it.

We will respond to them according to the context they set out.  However, I think that these are issues which you should be dealing with in your other thread and my site team colleague @dx100uk will help you through it

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder received a response from the original investigator at the FOS 

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder this was the email i sent that generated the above response also I now have a crime reference number too .

 

Thank you for your email please accept this email as acknowledgement of receiving the decision.
 

I am currently considering the decision and in order to help me consider the situation could you provide me with details of any domestic, or economic or financial abuse policies which have been implemented and also if I could have details of your interactions with any abuse organisations.
 

I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

[BankFodder]

Thank you.
They are treating it as an FOIA request – which is fine.

Did you send a similar letter to Aviva?

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder yes I did 

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder please check inbox

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder

 

Hi I rang the FOS yesterday afternoon the handler emailed the ombudsman and the investigator directly for an extension but he said they might not get back to us in time the data protection officer has also acknowledged my request and emailed to say they will be sending the information directly 

Interestingly yesterday experian got back to me saying one of the loan companies omni finance are saying they've spoken to myself and completed DPA obviously it's not myself but I'm wondering if he's had a female impersonate me and would I be digging myself into a deeper hole, I need to speak to each company in turn myself by looks of it 

 

Spoke to omni finance its Z's email and bank details there too gave them crime reference will be getting passed to fraud team

I think in the meantime we should work on the rejection and objections on a letter in case the FOS doesn't get back to us in time what are your thoughts? X

Edited May 5, 2021 by dx100uk

[Manxman in exile]

"Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I'm required to ask Mrs B to accept or reject my decision before 11 May 2021".

 

I'd have thought it's a no-brainer isn't it?  You need to inform the FOS you are rejecting the decision irrespective of whether you get a reply to any SAR.  I don't see that any SAR response could possibly lead you to accept their decision.

 

(Unless I'm missing something obvious, there is no downside in rejecting the FOS decision, is there?  I presume there are no costs involved?)

 

 

[BankFodder]

Of course there's no downside to declining the decision and that is what should happen. However, I've suggested that the letter declining the decision should be accompanied by some basic objections to the way the decision has been made.

Although these objections won't have any effect, I don't see there is any downside to lodging them and at least they will go on file.

It's clear that the application to Aviva had all the hallmarks of domestic abuse or/and also fraud.

The ombudsman's decision basically says that Aviva had a "process" and that process was followed therefore the whole thing was fair. Nobody has asked any questions about the fairness of Aviva's "process" and in fact the "process" has never been disclosed to the OP – the victim of this – and it's not clear that it has even been disclosed to the FOS.

Furthermore, Aviva make a big thing about having financial abuse training et cetera but there is no disclosure on their website what their training might be or whether they have an abuse policy in place. Furthermore there is no indication on the FOS decision that they have considered whether or not an abuse policy has been considered by Aviva – and we believe in fact that the FOS has never even asked the question.

As usual, this is another example of a poor quality decision made by the FOS.

The letter declining the decision must be sent by next Tuesday. This means that there is no hurry. Requests have been sent to Aviva and to the FOS for information. Frankly nobody seriously expects that the information will arrive in time – but you never know.

I should point out that even if the FOS decision is not formally declined, a failure to respond is taken as a non-acceptance of the decision.

The failure by Aviva and also the FOS to disclose on their websites any abuse policies is basically saying that they have a set of rules in place that they won't disclose what they are.

Imagine sitting down to a game of cards were somebody. Your opponent says that they are playing by a set of rules but they're not going to tell you what they are. All you know is that every card you play is scooped up by the other side and when you ask why – you are told that there is a process/set of rules – but they are secret and you will never know what those rules are. Just keep on playing.

[honeybee13]

TT, how did it go with the police last week? I don't think I've seen it mentioned.

 

HB

[Titchytitch]

@honeybee13I got a crime reference number @BankFodderI've rung companies directly where further loans have been taken and they were to buy his private registerations I have also raised the frauds with the companies 

@BankFodder the ombudsman got back to me saying an extension will be fine ive asked for 6wks but she hadn't confirmed that this is fine yet 

[Manxman in exile]

Sorry - not made myself clear.

 

Yes - I agree it would be best for the OP to explain why they are rejecting the FOS decision, but they must not miss the date given by the FOS to reject* their decision just because they have not yet received replies to all the SARs they have sent out.  They should meet that rejection deadline whatever responses they have or have not received.

 

If necessary I would tell the FOS something like "I hereby notify you that I reject the FOS decision reference xxxxxxx and I shall supply detailed reasons for that rejection pending receipt of replies to SARs I have requested".  If the OP has not received any replies she needs to get that holding rejection off to the FOS in time for 11 May - so there isn't much time left.

 

And I agree that the FOS finding that because Aviva followed their internal procedures they have not done anything wrong is clearly barmy as the internal procedure they have followed will inevitably result in something going wrong because it is flawed.  It is clearly wrong that the OP could be held to have entered into a binding contract with Aviva simply on the assertion by her brother that he was acting on the OP's behalf and where Aviva made no attempt to verify that assertion.  It's clearly wrong otherwise people would be entering into legal contracts that they knew nothing about all the time.

 

I also agree that the FOS investigation does not seem to have invited much involvement from the OP, but I am also concerned that the FOS decision has clearly been based upon evidence that Aviva wrote several times to the OP (eg renewal letters) but the OP is adamant that nothing was ever received.  I think that is a gap that has to be closed by the OP, and when it is it will make the FOS decision unsustainable.

 

*I note that the FOS decision does not say they need reasons for rejection by 11 May, simply notification of rejection.  I would suggest there is nothing to stop the OP saying "I reject your decision - reasons to follow pending SAR"

 

PS - just noticed OP has cross-posted.

 

EDIT:  Having just read the OP's recent post I think the emerging pattern of criminal behaviour by her brother just reinforces the OP's case.  To be honest, I am surprised AVIVA continue to pursue this as it shows them in an appalling light.  If I were contemplating becoming a customer of theirs, I would be put off.  I don't want my insurer being a victim of insurance scams because they don't have proper procedures in place to safeguard their own position and their other customers.  It's the customers who will end up paying for writing it off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Manxman in exile

[Titchytitch]

@bankfodder Katie the investigator has said 6wks extension is fine for decision to be accepted/rejected 

[Manxman in exile]

Ah ok - FOS have granted an extension to the rejection deadline.

[BankFodder]

Very good news about the extension. Have you got in writing? Send them an email immediately and confirm the conversation that you have had with them – naming the person that you spoke to and confirming that you are pleased to understand that there has been an extension.

Of course it won't make any difference to the final decision that it will allow us to gather more information in the intervening time.

I suggest that you send an SAR to any company that you can identify which appears to have been approached by somebody representing themselves as you. In particular, the one in which you say that there was a conversation – send them on SAR immediately. Use our very wide template and make sure it refers to everything including voice recordings.

Now we have some time to wait for FO I disclosures and SAR disclosures.

Don't waste any time in getting SARs off.

Also, probably worth hassling the police a bit more and try to get them to record this not only as a domestic abuse case but also as an example of fraud contrary to the Fraud Act 2006

You had better make a diary note to remind you of the new deadline for declining the decision. Six weeks is far enough away that we will forget it. Give us a weeks notice

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodder shes responded on email to me to say its fine thats all I will respond to say thank you for confirming the extension I will endeavour to respond back to you by 22nd June 2021 

 

I have sent SAR's already to all companies but they've agreed to look into them as fraud 

[BankFodder]

In addition to the information that you might get, I think we are especially interested to know if any company refuses to disclose data to you because they say that it is not yours.

[Titchytitch]

@BankFodderI'll keep you posted and updated but for now the companies I have managed to speak to are passing the information to their fraud team x

[BankFodder]

Also, have you provided details of all of these companies to the police?

 

But have you sent them valid SARs? Have they acknowledged them

[Titchytitch]

I sent them SARs around 10days ago and I disputed transactions with he credit agencies a lot are coming back saying data is accurate so I'm now having to ring each company to get them to remove their information from my report 

 

Yes police have all companies details and I've also provided companies with crime reference number 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Titchytitch