Best course of action: Ombudsman or Court

[tifo]

How are they "annoying sometimes"?

 

Can you explain further please

 

I was under the impression that they acted like a 'informal court', which are their own words.

 

But they do not make a decision based on the info you might provide, like a court does, but stick to their own remit. I submitted everything i could find on the bank paying charges + CI and they completely ignored everything, stating they only look at charges + stat 8% simple interest which the bank had offered. This is despite sending it to a department set up to look at things like what interest rate to apply, wasting about 6 weeks in looking at it again, and then only stating the same remit as before, so why waste time saying they will look at it again?

 

I have had 3 cases as above and have to settle at charges + 8% interest as the banks have offered that and i cannot take it to court now (would be only for CI).

 

On one complaint the bank offered me charges + compounded 8% interest and i agreed. The FOS then said the bank should have offered only simple interest and tried to get the bank to offer less, but in their own remit any offer the bank makes is binding on it, so i guess they can't do much.

 

I hope that explains how they can be annoying in that they stick to their own remit and won't look at anything outside it, so they're not really an 'informal court' but simply parrots following set guidelines.

 

The lesson is if you want charges + simple 8% interest then use the Ombudsman. If you want anything more then they are useless.

 

I'm not too sure how they are like on credit card claims or something more complex like defaults, s.78 or s85, PPI etc.

[Surfer01]

I wrote a preliminary to ationwide and got then standard letter fobbing me off and advising if I was not happy with their decisionto escalate it to the FOS which i promptly did enclosing a copy of Nationwide's letter, my prelim and a list of the charges plus interest. Sent recorded mail yesterday and now waiting. Hope I get a refund in time for my holiday in September.

[bwdski]

I was under the impression that they acted like a 'informal court', which are their own words.

 

But they do not make a decision based on the info you might provide, like a court does, but stick to their own remit. I submitted everything i could find on the bank paying charges + CI and they completely ignored everything, stating they only look at charges + stat 8% simple interest which the bank had offered. This is despite sending it to a department set up to look at things like what interest rate to apply, wasting about 6 weeks in looking at it again, and then only stating the same remit as before, so why waste time saying they will look at it again?

 

I have had 3 cases as above and have to settle at charges + 8% interest as the banks have offered that and i cannot take it to court now (would be only for CI).

 

On one complaint the bank offered me charges + compounded 8% interest and i agreed. The FOS then said the bank should have offered only simple interest and tried to get the bank to offer less, but in their own remit any offer the bank makes is binding on it, so i guess they can't do much.

 

I hope that explains how they can be annoying in that they stick to their own remit and won't look at anything outside it, so they're not really an 'informal court' but simply parrots following set guidelines.

 

The lesson is if you want charges + simple 8% interest then use the Ombudsman. If you want anything more then they are useless.

 

I'm not too sure how they are like on credit card claims or something more complex like defaults, s.78 or s85, PPI etc.

 

So you got your money +8% interest back?

 

Isn't that what we're asking for?

Or at least, that's what the interest calculator works out for us.

 

Another victory for the Ombudsman?

[tifo]

So you got your money +8% interest back?

 

Isn't that what we're asking for?

Or at least, that's what the interest calculator works out for us.

 

Another victory for the Ombudsman?

 

I asked for charges + unauthorised interest rate under mutuality and reciprocity (now dead) and fairness and balance as well as fair equity.

 

The bank offered me all the charges back before i went to Ombudsman, they then got me 8% interest and i refused, they looked at it again and said we can't help you more, so i've accepted the offers.

 

What i was saying above is that i had these offers way back in May (charges + 8% interest) and if the Ombudsman was not going to get me anything more, why did they waste my and their own time saying they'll look at it again? They would have known at the time that there's no use looking at it as it's not in their *self proclaimed* remit.

 

I'm also not happy that they tried to get the bank to decrease their offer (would have only made £50 difference) but their remit is to mediate and for me to accept or decline. They don't demand the bank to increase their offers, only make 'requests' which the bank declines, yet they want to demand a lesser offer to me.

 

(i said to an Adjudicator that the bank has offered compounded 8% which i am accepting, and she said they shouldn't do that, only offer simple 8%). Too late now as they sent me the offer in writing and i have accepted within the time stated.

 

They shouldn't be bothered what the bank offers as long as i accept or decline it.

[bwdski]

I asked for charges + unauthorised interest rate under mutuality and reciprocity (now dead) and fairness and balance as well as fair equity.

 

The bank offered me all the charges back before i went to Ombudsman, they then got me 8% interest and i refused, they looked at it again and said we can't help you more, so i've accepted the offers.

 

What i was saying above is that i had these offers way back in May (charges + 8% interest) and if the Ombudsman was not going to get me anything more, why did they waste my and their own time saying they'll look at it again? They would have known at the time that there's no use looking at it as it's not in their *self proclaimed* remit.

 

I'm also not happy that they tried to get the bank to decrease their offer (would have only made £50 difference) but their remit is to mediate and for me to accept or decline. They don't demand the bank to increase their offers, only make 'requests' which the bank declines, yet they want to demand a lesser offer.

 

I think that most of us would be happy with the charges plus 8% interest.

That's what we're going for anyhow.

[traceybird]

Any ideas on timescales, FO said they'd contacted the bank on 10th July, but heard nothing since?

Cheers

[tifo]

i'm happy as CI is difficult, but i'm annoyed they made me waste over 8 weeks to tell me the same thing as before when they have really not looked into it at all, contrary to what they stated before.

 

Each Adjudicator has their own advice on what to ask for (or not to ask) and really they have no idea i think and look to the bank to make an offer based on the 'formal investigation' stick.

 

They have stated in letters that there are no precedents in court or guidelines to follow so they cannot make an order against any bank, just requests.

 

I think they're keeping a balance of making both parties happy, where the bank gets to pay only 8% interest and not the extra costs and CI if it went to court, and the individual gets his/her charges plus 8% interest.

[bwdski]

i'm happy as CI is difficult, but i'm annoyed they made me waste over 8 weeks to tell me the same thing as before when they have really not looked into it at all, contrary to what they stated before.

 

Each Adjudicator has their own advice on what to ask for (or not to ask) and really they have no idea i think and look to the bank to make an offer based on the 'formal investigation' stick.

 

They have stated in letters that there are no precedents in court or guidelines to follow so they cannot make an order against any bank, just requests.

 

I think they're keeping a balance of making both parties happy, where the bank gets to pay only 8% interest and not the extra costs and CI if it went to court, and the individual gets his/her charges plus 8% interest.

 

At the end of the day, I'd quite gladly wait 8 weeks to get my money back.

The Ombudsman have a 100% record so far.

Going the Ombudsman route is going to save a lot of paper and ink compared to going the court route.

 

Another reason as to choosing the Ombudsman... It's a "greener" option too... save a tree

[tifo]

Another reason as to choosing the Ombudsman... It's a "greener" option too... save a tree

 

You'll need to balance the carbon footprint you use in the complaint by doing something positive elsewhere, like not driving during the period of the claim!

[bwdski]

You'll need to balance the carbon footprint you use in the complaint by doing something positive elsewhere, like not driving during the period of the claim!

 

I don't drive

[tifo]

I don't drive

 

maybe cut down on meat cos this morning they said it contributes to global warming (now you're gonna say you're vegetarian).

[bwdski]

maybe cut down on meat cos this morning they said it contributes to global warming (now you're gonna say you're vegetarian).

 

No mate... Pescetarian

[tifo]

another clanger from the Ombudsman.

 

new case - they have asked the bank for information on how they calculated my charges and will keep me updated in 4 weeks time if i don't hear anything before then.

 

then they say i should let them know within 2 weeks if i am going to continue to use their service or take court action.

 

how can i decide to take court action if the bank hasn't replied to their, and my, request? only when the bank says Yeah or Nay and the Ombudsman says No Can Do will i decide what to do.

 

Are they trying to push me to court action cos they're so busy these days and why don't they do their job of actually mediating?

 

(and they did say the OFT has not set any charge for a default so there goes the banks £12 argument).

[bed32]

Any ideas on timescales, FO said they'd contacted the bank on 10th July, but heard nothing since?

Cheers

FOS are very busy these days - you can just about expect a letter every 28 days

[bwdski]

is that such a long time to wait?

[claimb]

hello! just wondering if the FOS deal with claims exceeding the 6 year time limit allowed. and if anyone has succeeded in reclaiming more than 6 years of charges through the FOS. thanks!

[horrocks44]

Just for clarity, will the Ombudsman award charges PLUS the relevant proportion of simple interest as originally charged by your bank (as calculated on the spreadsheets) plus (as a final resort) the 8%, or will he only award the charges + (as a final resort) the 8%?

[tifo]

FOS will only look at claims going back a maximum of 6 years from the date of your complaint.

 

They will ask for charges + interest charged by bank on these charges + interest at 8% charged by you on your claim.

 

They do no 'award' anything, just 'ask' the bank. This is because there is no legal precedent yet set in court for bank charges so they cannot say it is unlawful.

[Aqualibrium]

Any ideas on timescales, FO said they'd contacted the bank on 10th July, but heard nothing since?

Cheers

 

 

Ditto. And I received an offer of settlement from the bank, via the Ombudsman, yesterday that exceeded my original claim amount by 140 pounds.

 

If you haven't heard, it shouldn't be long. It will probably depend on the bank you are pursuing, it's not just the FOS timescales here, they give the bank 6 wks to reply to their request for information they need to carry out an investigation into the charges, if the bank does not respond within the 6wks the FOS will contact you and let you know.

 

I have a feeling you will receive an offer within the 6wks, as yet, the FOS has not had to investigate.

[Tazzman]

I have just sent mine off the other day to the ombudsman so here goes....

[traceybird]

Just to let you know, I've been offered my full amount via the FO £9922, not with interest, but considering what's gone on, I'm very happy with that! It'll take 6 wks to the banks paying up (why, i don't know , funny how it doesn't take an eternity for them to take it from our accounts!). Just thank myself lucky now!

Cheers

Tracy

[Aqualibrium]

Congratulations!

Excellent news Tracey

[Tazzman]

I have just had my paperwork returned by the FOS saying they have registered my case and that until the high court have ruked they are not dealing with any more cases.

[traceybird]

Ditto. And I received an offer of settlement from the bank, via the Ombudsman, yesterday that exceeded my original claim amount by 140 pounds.

 

If you haven't heard, it shouldn't be long. It will probably depend on the bank you are pursuing, it's not just the FOS timescales here, they give the bank 6 wks to reply to their request for information they need to carry out an investigation into the charges, if the bank does not respond within the 6wks the FOS will contact you and let you know.

 

I have a feeling you will receive an offer within the 6wks, as yet, the FOS has not had to investigate.

 

Thanx!

I had my letter from the FO yesterday, saying they had written to the bank, and the wait of up to 6 wks for payment. I really think myself lucky with now so many having to wait - bad decision by the OFT. They should have demanded the banks pay up existing claims, then new ones put on hold, after all they are supposed to represent the consumer.

Just hope the judges looking at this aren't in the Masons with the Banks

So whilst I'm obviosly pleased for me, the shine is taken off because if i had been one of the unlucky ones, I would have been so gutted.