Dunstonh, Moneyinepitude et al

Brokerwise

Quentin wrote: »

I agree.

But no-one should be expected to accept the false accusations made against me (and MSE)

I stated certain areas of this site and not as a whole as you well know.

magpiecottage

roonaldo wrote: »

this stopped (contractors on a pay per case basis) in 2010 as the system was being abused.

They don't get a pay per case deal but it still happens. They get carrot in the form of bonus and stick in the form of being kicked out if they do not "close" enough cases. An "out of jurisdiction" closure is an easy one for them.

So it is still being abused - it is just not so obvious.

Quentin wrote: »

The procedure encourages complaints to be escalated to the FOS if we aren't happy with the response.

The FOS don't charge the complainant, so they have nothing to lose by escalating their complaint, except the cost of a stamp.

All the cost of the service goes on the company.

A company facing a FOS adjudication knows the high cost (win or lose), thus can make a business decision to save that cost by making a goodwill gesture.

In other words consumers can blackmail firms with a threat of "Pay Up or face a fee of £850".

I am not suggesting you are doing that but sadly there are plenty out there who do. I have seen widows and orphans of advisers pursued for thousands of pounds by people who knew what they were doing and the adviser considered so much as friends that he arranged a policy for them at no cost and taking no commission.

Quentin wrote: »

Then magpoecittage attempts a bit of touting for business.

I said that I would not provide a detailed response FOC (why should I?) and that I would NOT initiate a pm correspondence with a view to a commercial arrangement.

It is entirely up to the OP if (s)he wants to do so.

Quentin

magpiecottage wrote: »

I would NOT initiate a pm correspondence with a view to a commercial arrangement.

It is entirely up to the OP if (s)he wants to do so.

No it isn't.

You cannot tout for business by abusing the pm system and inviting/suggesting people contact you by pm regarding you doing work for them as you did:

if the OP wants to do that I will leave it to them to pm me

(I see your touting post has been removed.)

Quentin

magpiecottage wrote: »

....In other words consumers can blackmail firms with a threat of "Pay Up or face a fee of £850".

I am not suggesting you are doing that but sadly there are plenty out there who do.......

But you are connecting your "other words" to me by quoting my post and then using them to tell us they mean "blackmail".

Where on MSE have you any evidence that I or your unamed "plenty" are advocating blackmail?

Perhaps you can distance your blackmail comments from my post?

Insider101

Annisele wrote: »

I do see your point, but logically I think it's hard to "dismiss a complaint without consideration of its merits" on the grounds that "having considered the broker's evidence, I think the complaint is frivolous and vexatious because it is without merit".

If FOS does dismiss without consideration of the merits, that doesn't necessarily mean it won't charge a case fee - see this factsheet, which says:

I understand the practical difficulties and it may seem like a contradictory in terms to many. However, just pointing out that the provision is there under FCA rules. In this event, the customer has alleged he was not informed of two things and yet the broker has provided a recorded call of the customer's own voice proving they were. Whilst I appreciate that technically FOs will be "considering the merits" of the complaint I rather doubt it will take too much consideration.

magpiecottage

Quentin wrote: »

But you are connecting your "other words" to me by quoting my post and then using them to tell us they mean "blackmail".

Lets see what you said:

Quentin wrote: »

Which is why people knowing this on MSE advise it's well worth pursuing a complaint to the FOS.

Why would you say that if you are not endorsing that approach?

Bearing in mind the management time involved with dealing with the FOS it is a likely outcome a company will take a business approach to a complaint and nip it in the bud by making a goodwill gesture to the client. Far better business than allowing a complaint to escalate at far greater cost.

That sounds even more like you are endorsing it.

And this is a moneysaving, revenge getting website!!

And, unless this was meant to be satirical, it is somewhat conclusive. You want revenge, not justice, no regard to whether or not a missale ever really took place.

Perhaps you can distance your blackmail comments from my post?

I tried to do that before but you decided it was not enough for you so I had a closer look and now think there is merit the views of those who think you are. Certainly more than in me making a statement of fact that somebody wanting to seek a business contract with me, or any other professional posting on this site can pm them.

FTR I have no expectation that the OP will contact me.

WatchMan

magpiecottage wrote: »

The adjudicators get paid an incentive for each case the "close". So they can (and do) look at complaints where there is clearly no case to answer to decide if they have jurisdiction and get their few bob.

magpiecottage wrote: »

They don't get a pay per case deal but it still happens. They get carrot in the form of bonus and stick in the form of being kicked out if they do not "close" enough cases. An "out of jurisdiction" closure is an easy one for them.

Not entirely true.

magpiecottage

I have a case where a complainant was told in writing in 2006 that he had six months to go to FOS "notwithstanding any further correspondence between us".

He eventually went to FOS in 2013. I sent a copy of the letter to FOS as soon as the complaint arrived.

So why do you think an adjudicator has now got involved? Either they are on the make or they are too stupid to recognise the blatantly obvious.

WatchMan

magpiecottage wrote: »

I have a case where a complainant was told in writing in 2006 that he had six months to go to FOS "notwithstanding any further correspondence between us".

He eventually went to FOS in 2013. I sent a copy of the letter to FOS as soon as the complaint arrived.

So why do you think an adjudicator has now got involved? Either they are on the make or they are too stupid to recognise the blatantly obvious.

And what happened when you sent in your letter? Was the case given a merits assessment... or has it been booted? Or, is this all still ongoing?

It would be normal for an adjudicator to write to the respondent in the first instance asking for their submissions etc. Then, as per disp, it is up to them to raise a time limit objection.

Stupid_Question

magpiecottage wrote: »

So why do you think an adjudicator has now got involved? Either they are on the make or they are too stupid to recognise the blatantly obvious.

As someone who on a weekly basis has to explain the extent of their jurisdiction to them, I've highlighted the relevant section of your post.

I think we can all agree that the FOS is barely fit for purpose, but this is a problem that's unlikely to be resolved until the PPI issue runs its course.