rejected by ombudsman

cam777

Hi, I went with a company that advertised they reclaim miss sold PPI, well it was rejected by Capital One credit card, so it went to the ombudsman. They too rejected the claim, even though it is a genuine claim. My question is, is this the end of the line for me as regards getting my money back on all the years they took money off me, for something i didnt want, or is there something else I can do to get them to change there minds and reassess my case? Thanks for any help and advice that is posted in response to my question.

dunstonh

My question is, is this the end of the line for me as regards getting my money back on all the years they took money off me, for something i didnt want, or is there something else I can do to get them to change there minds and reassess my case?

You can appeal the adjudicators decision but in most cases the ombudsman would agree.

remember that there is nothing wrong with having the insurance. You need to have something done wrong or set up incorrectly for it to be classed as a mis-sale. If you didnt want to pay it for all those years then why did you?

di3004

Hi and welcome

May I ask if this was rejected by the Adjudicator?

Normally the Adjudicator investigates complaints first, and if this fails where they reject, you should get the opportunity to have this viewed by the Ombudsman - who reviews the whole complaint all over again.

roonaldo

cam777 wrote: »

My question is, is this the end of the line for me as regards getting my money back on all the years they took money off me, for something i didnt want.

If you didnt want it then you should of cancelled it, remember it was providing you with cover. This weakens your arguement, you say you didn't want it but you paid for it for years, from a neutral point of view it looks like you were happy for it.

You can ask for the Ombudsman to make a final decision, but a majority of the time they will agree with the adjudicators decision.

src007

roonaldo maybe you can explain this for me, as you used to work for the FOS.

When the FOS started releasing stats they upheld 98% of Capital One insurance complaints.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/complaints-data/earlier-data/2009-H1-resolvedcases-bypercentageupheld.pdf

Now they reject the vast majority. Last time it was 40% uphold rate and I suspect it will be lower still next time.

They must only have been upholding them because of the way that Capital One handled the complaints back in 2009? But then FOS are supposed to always look at the underlying merit rather than how the complaints are handled?

Fair and reasonable? More like Luck of the draw.

Against Capital One at FOS I would throw in the towel.

dunstonh

I cant explain the specific case you mention src007 but if you look back at past "widespread" complaints issues, you tend to find that areas that are seen to be open to abuse with try-it-on complaints get upheld early on as no-one early on realises they are a try-it-on complaint at that stage. Then when the complaints handler is getting dozens of complaints a week saying the same thing every time and a bit of cynicism creeps in along with the company in question being able to put a better argument in than they have early on, you tend to find a more stringent review of the complaint takes place.

With endowments, many used the "past retirement age" as an reason for complaint. Early on, they were more often than not upheld. However, towards the end of the endowment issue, evidence of retirement dates was sought as they had so many people saying they were planning to retire when they were 45-55.