Is there a 6 month limit to getting the Financial Ombudsman involved?

buel

Hi,
I have had a 6 month disagreement with my pension provider which has had several letters to and fro. They have just replied saying 'You have 6 months from the date of our original response, so you would still have time' about going to the Financial Ombudsman service.

Is this true please?

dunstonh

When you make the complaint to the firm and they reject your complaint, they then give you 6 months to go to the FOS if you disagree with that. If you do not go to the FOS within that 6 month window, they can bar the FOS from looking at your complaint.

If you have had continued documented discussion between the complaints section I cant really see how they can impose the 6 month time bar until their final response. I think you could argue this successfully with the FOS to get them to overrule the timebar.

buel

dunstonh wrote: »

When you make the complaint to the firm and they reject your complaint, they then give you 6 months to go to the FOS if you disagree with that. If you do not go to the FOS within that 6 month window, they can bar the FOS from looking at your complaint.

If you have had continued documented discussion between the complaints section I cant really see how they can impose the 6 month time bar until their final response. I think you could argue this successfully with the FOS to get them to overrule the timebar.

Thank you Dunstonh, excellent advice as usual.
I read the criteria on the FOS' site and my confusion is this:

In the Pension providers second letter in December (not their original response, which was November, as they stated) they do satisfy the criteria of (c) (even though they did not 'reject' the complaint, they simply attempted to deflect my question) and (e), below:


The definition of a final response includes a requirement to tell the consumer about the Financial Ombudsman Service and the six-month time limit. It says that a final response is:
"... a written response from the respondent which:
(a) accepts the complaint and, where appropriate, offers redress or remedial action; or
(b) offers redress or remedial action without accepting the complaint; or
(c) rejects the complaint and gives reasons for doing so;
and which:
(d) encloses a copy of the Financial Ombudsman Service's standard explanatory leaflet; and
(e) informs the complainant that, if he remains dissatisfied with the respondent’s response, he may now refer his complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service and must do so within six months."



However, only in their most recent letter, two weeks ago, do they state that it was their 'final response'. During this time there have been several (four each way) letters with them refusing to answer some of my questions and evading others but also contradicting themselves with their varying 'explanations'.

In your opion, does it make any difference that they have only just stated that their answer is their 'final response'?

dunstonh

In your opion, does it make any difference that they have only just stated that their answer is their 'final response'?

e) is the key one. However, I suspect it wouldnt matter as the FOS would likely agree that if they engage in ongoing communication then it is clearly not a final response.

So, since that letter, has there been further communication that was more than them just saying "we are not talking to you anymore, go to the FOS if you dont like it" (in a more nicely worded way of course).

buel

dunstonh wrote: »

So, since that letter, has there been further communication that was more than them just saying "we are not talking to you anymore, go to the FOS if you dont like it" (in a more nicely worded way of course).

Oh yes,
I have been asking them why they seem so reluctant to report my employer to the Pensions Ombudsman for making 15 consecutive late payments to my pension and even missing some months and since their first reply in November and their last reply in late March they have sent me correspondence with such contradictory information as:
'Your policy is classed as a 'due date' policy, irrespective of when we receive payments from your employer the premiums are applied to your policy using the unit price applicable on the 28th of each month'
to
'Taking into account the recent late payment, we considered it appropriate to write to your employer to explain to them that they have a legal obligation to make sure that all relevant payments are made to us in a timely fashion. In this letter, we also explained to them the implications of not doing so'
to the latest letter, in reply to my letter explaining how several Scottish Widows employees have told me in phone conversations how there is no agreement in place and how my employer is several months behind with their contributions, saying
'I understand that you received contradictory information when you called. Im sorry this happened and i have fed this back to the manager of the individual concerned. The vast majority of most pension policies only invest the money when it is received. However, in this case, we have an agreement with your employer to use a set date. We purchase the units and they pay us for them at a later date. As everything gets backdated to when it should be, there really is no concern for you. In other words, i think you can rest easy as i believe this is a secure and robust methodolgy they are employing. To be clear; it makes no difference when they actually send us the funds.This helps you keep track of what is going on and also reassures you, in the case they are late.'

I have asked them four times if i wanted to transfer my pension at a time when my employer was several months behind with their contributions, would my transfer value include the units that have supposedly been bought or not, they have never answered this.

Please share me your thoughts on this issue?

buel

I just thought i'd bump this D.

buel

Need to bump this im afraid.

dunstonh

good job you did. I had missed it.

I can see the point the provider is making if they are funding the payments and they are responsible for collecting the money if a shortfall and if that is not passed to you. However, if they cannot answer your question on whether they make that shortfall up if the employer ultimately does not pay then you do have grounds for complaint. Although it is not one of redress but one of trying to get an absolute answer.

buel

Thanks for that.
Yes, an absolute answer is all i have ever tried to get but they have refused to answer in four letters i have asked.

Please could i ask how such an 'agreement' is different from this:

An architectural firm delaying employer and employee pension contributions due to cashflow problems. Think it was the Times, but here's a non-paywall report:

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/n...628897.article

Thanks to tocsin for the link.

Annisele

dunstonh wrote: »

e) is the key one. However, I suspect it wouldnt matter as the FOS would likely agree that if they engage in ongoing communication then it is clearly not a final response.

I'm not convinced by that. If the OP is still within six month's of the firm's "final response", then I'd suggest it's far better for him to approach FOS now than to hope he doesn't get timebarred if he goes to FOS later.

Firms don't have to say "this is my final response", and in general continuing to correspond with their customer does not restart the six month clock.

If the firm sent a letter which is a "final response" within the meaning of DISP 1.6.2R, and if the consumer refers the matter to FOS more than six months later, and if the firm objects to FOS considering the matter - then FOS can only overturn the timebar if "the failure to comply with the time limits...was as a result of exceptional circumstances" (DISP 2.8.2R).

So, OP - if you do want to go to FOS, I think you should hurry up rather than hope to be able to rely on exceptional circumstances later.

However, I'm not completely convinced FOS is the best place for your complaint. You might benefit from an informal chat with The Pensions Advisory Service if you haven't already done so. But don't delay referring to FOS while you do that!

buel

That is very helpful, thank you so much!!
I'll get on it!