Alliance Trust Savings massive fee hike

chris1

juliamarsh wrote: »

Mess up No. 2 - transfer forms enclosed for me to sign as 4 of the certificates had to be sent back to be reregistered due to their having failed to spell my name correctly!

Has anyone received their replacement certificates yet?

juliamarsh

I have got all mine now, but they arrived in dribs and drabs over the course of several weeks, the last one arrived last week. Just waiting to hear from the Ombudsman now - has anybody heard from them yet?

SnowMan

juliamarsh wrote: »

I have got all mine now, but they arrived in dribs and drabs over the course of several weeks, the last one arrived last week. Just waiting to hear from the Ombudsman now - has anybody heard from them yet?

Just to say that I have a very similar issue (platform fees raised by a different platform at short notice who then wanted to charge for re-registration when I moved away).

I received a final response from the firm (effectively saying we are not budging) and took it to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) in January 2012. The FOS acknowledgement of my complaint took about a week. The FOS wrote to me in June then to explain the process (the process is explained on their website). The FOS then rang me a few weeks ago to get my side of the story and are now going to contact the firm.

If a solution can't be negotiated, I can't see the platform changing their position in my case, then the FOS adjudicator make their initial decision and if I am not happy with that I or the firm can then ask for it to be looked at again by an official Ombudsman.

I don't want to say too much at this stage but will post up to say what happens in my case.

But looking at that unfair terms document from the FSA that Optimist posted earlier on this thread, I think I have a strong case. The change was profit motivated (platform admit this in writing) and made at short notice without waiving of exit fees and not taking into account the practical barriers in moving away without charge.

Should say although the process takes a long time I am impressed by how the FOS has handled it so far.

SnowMan

SnowMan wrote: »

I don't want to say too much at this stage but will post up to say what happens in my case.

I really didn't expect to be posting again so soon and had no inkling that the matter was close to being resolved, but have found out this afternoon my complaint has been upheld see this post for more details.

While each case is individual hope it gives those on this thread who have taken up complaints for a very similar issue with ATS some encouragement.

Good luck all :beer:

koru

koru wrote: »

Can I suggest that everyone who is adversely affected by these fee increases should make a report to the FSA about the contravention by ATS of the Unfair Contract Terms regulations? This can be done using their online form here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/doing/regulated/uct/faqs/form

This is quite separate from the Financial Ombudsman complaints procedure. You can report the contravention without having made any complaint to ATS.

Today I heard the results of my complaint to the FSA. Strangely, the conclusion was that the term regarding changes in charges is not unfair, despite the fact that the closure charges are not waived and so the punter is left with a choice of either putting up with the fee hike or paying hundreds of pounds of charges to transfer out. In other words, this view directly contradicts Snowman's experience with the ombudsman. Fingers crossed that the ombudsman gives me the same response as Snowman.

grey_gym_sock

which kind of account did you have? i wonder if the case is stronger when there are new ongoing fees where there were no ongoing fees before, rather than where ongoing fees are increased.

chris1

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

which kind of account did you have? i wonder if the case is stronger when there are new ongoing fees where there were no ongoing fees before, rather than where ongoing fees are increased.

With Alliance there were no ongoing fees, new ones were introduced. There was always a fee to withdraw, but then no-one would need to withdraw if they hadn't introduced new ongoing fees...

grey_gym_sock

is that just for unwrapped? i thought they already had ongoing fees for ISAs.

chris1

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

is that just for unwrapped? i thought they already had ongoing fees for ISAs.

Unwrapped - never had any ongoing fees.

koru

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

which kind of account did you have? i wonder if the case is stronger when there are new ongoing fees where there were no ongoing fees before, rather than where ongoing fees are increased.

This was on an unwrapped investment account, which previously had no fees. And on an ISA, which did have fees.