Ombudsman rejected claim without even investigating

DaveTheMus

hogman252 wrote: »

I was rather hoping for some 'Advice', not a statement of the obvious!

Advice?

Forget it and move on with your life.

hogman252

roonaldo wrote: »

I actually worked as a FOS adjudicator myself four years ago and the "I didnt get that letter or document" must have been said to me by every other complainant. I've never known so much post to go missing!

Just to make a further point, i am extremely fastidious about paperwork, filing every piece of correspondance. I do not loose or misplace letters sent to me. So when i say that i did not receive a final response letter from the Leeds and Holbeck Building Society, i did NOT receive a letter from them.

Given that roonaldo was an FOS adjudicator, does it not strike him as odd just how many people make this complaint of not receiving letters, or does he assume that all of these people are liars. Is it not conceiveable, that Insurance companies could be purposely taking a position of not sending out such letters, the hiding behind the six month time limit?

Indeed, why is there even a time limit? There isn't a time limit as such with regards to how far back you can go in time to make a claim, so why should there be a time limit imposed once a claim is started?

It just seems to me that the FOS isn't truly interested the rights of the consumer, more interested in clearing the backlog of cases as quickly as possible by dismissing those it sees as not blindingly obvious.

[Deleted User]

hogman252 wrote: »

i did NOT receive a letter from them.

For the final time, this doesn't matter because you had adequate time (six months) to complain that you had had no reply to your original concerns.

hogman252 wrote: »

Indeed, why is there even a time limit? There isn't a time limit as such with regards to how far back you can go in time to make a claim, so why should there be a time limit imposed once a claim is started?

The FOS are busy enough, without a time limit they would have the added burden of people coming forward with unresolved "complaints" long after they should have done.

hogman252 wrote: »

Is it not conceiveable, that Insurance companies could be purposely taking a position of not sending out such letters, the hiding behind the six month time limit?

It might be "conceivable". but what would the "insurance companies" stand to gain? The vast majority of people would not leave it more than six months before contacting the lender demanding a response to their complaint!

Time to move on from this, there really is no more to be said.

roonaldo wrote: »

It's a monthly mortgage PPI so they probably would have rejected the complaint anyway.

Indeed.

hogman252

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

For the final time, this doesn't matter because you had adequate time (six months) to complain that you had had no reply to your original concerns.

If you do not wish to respond to my post, then please feel free to not do so. I mean it, please do not respond if you have nothing constructive to say.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

It might be "conceivable". but what would the "insurance companies" stand to gain? The vast majority of people would not leave it more than six months before contacting the lender demanding a response to their complaint!

And in actual fact, it wasn't that i didn't have a response from them within the six month time period. I actually had an initial response acknowledging my complaint, and stating that they would look into it, and that i should await for a response from them. It was then that they failed to give me a final decision within the six month time limit.

[Deleted User]

hogman252 wrote: »

If you do not wish to respond to my post, then please feel free to not do so. I mean it, please do not respond if you have nothing constructive to say.

I've responded and answered your posts both comprehensively and constructively, my point was that I'm not going to repeat myself again.
Regardless, this thread has run it's course and I'll respect your wishes that only people who agree that you have any case should reply.

hogman252 wrote: »

It was then that they failed to give me a final decision within the six month time limit.

They had eight weeks in which to respond, it was you who had six months to go to the Ombudsman.

magpiecottage

hogman252 wrote: »

Why is there even a time limit? There isn't a time limit as such with regards to how far back you can go in time to make a claim, so why should there be a time limit imposed once a claim is started?

It just seems to me that the FOS isn't truly interested the rights of the consumer

There is also an absolute time limit of 15 years in Law whcih, as you note, FOS ignores. If your assertion were true then it would apply it rigorously.

more interested in clearing the backlog of cases as quickly as possible by dismissing those it sees as not blindingly obvious.

I have a case at the moment where it has chosen to look at a complaint by a member of a pension scheme against an adviser because he helped the employer wind up its pension scheme. It is quite obvious there is no case to answer but it is still looking at it.

FOS has to work on the basis of what was most likely to have happened. Suppose it reckoned a quarter of all claims that letters had been sent out were bogus and that a quarter of all letters got lost in the post. That would mean that 75% × 75% = 56.25% were received and it would have to conclude that it was more likely than not that it had been.

The reality is more like 98% × 98% = 96.04%.

So you may be in that unlucky 4% but to FOS, it is probable that you were not.

In those circumstances the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 prevents it from investigating.

quaybab

In practice, a couple of weeks past the 6m deadline will not cause an issue. 3 weeks or more does. The 6m months rule is well published and is exists for situations where the respondent does not respond to complaints and you know this the case after 8 weeks.
It is actually an adjudicator (in none PPI) who rejects the claim first if the respondent contents out of time. You still have a right for your case to be considered by an ombudsman but they NEVER disagree with an adjudicator based on the same facts.

You have also learnt that anything you tell the FOS will use it against you by the FOS. You've probably learnt to stick to providers who use email or online secure messaging rather than snail mail.

Threaten the society with court action for money owed and bluff you have receipt confirmation you will serve them that the FOS received your claim in time but they have lost it. Since incompetence is rife in connection with the FOS, the society may cough.

Any other forumites with a Leeds and Holbeck BS PPI claim at the FOS which was put in 7 months or later after the final word would need to quote their FOS case number in order for you to contest an out of time dispute.

[Deleted User]

quaybab wrote: »

In practice, a couple of weeks past the 6m deadline will not cause an issue.

Clearly it did cause an issue or the Ombudsman would not have already refused the OP.

quaybab wrote: »

Threaten the society with court action for money owed and bluff you have receipt confirmation you will serve them that the FOS received your claim in time but they have lost it. Since incompetence is rife in connection with the FOS, the society may cough.

Is this a serious suggestion?

WatchMan

quaybab wrote: »

Threaten the society with court action for money owed and bluff you have receipt confirmation you will serve them that the FOS received your claim in time but they have lost it. Since incompetence is rife in connection with the FOS, the society may cough.

FOS will have informed the business that this complaint is not going to be looked into.

Foiled.

roonaldo

quaybab wrote: »

In practice, a couple of weeks past the 6m deadline will not cause an issue. 3 weeks or more does. The 6m months rule is well published and is exists for situations where the respondent does not respond to complaints and you know this the case after 8 weeks.

But the referral time is 6 months, its not 6 months and 2 weeks. 6 months is 6 months. If lucky you would only have an argument if it were a day or 2 and can blame the postal system.