Santander fined £12.4m for ‘serious failings’ in investment advice

illuminutter

I don't think Santander would have paid the £12m fine and agreed to write to all customers of the relevant products if the FCA's findings were based on hearsay.

Is compensation always consequent only on financial loss?

[Deleted User]

illuminutter wrote: »

Is compensation always consequent only on financial loss?

You can only be compensated for loss, otherwise it is not compensation!

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/compensation

illuminutter

OED: compensation - something, typically money, awarded to someone in recognition of loss, suffering, or injury.

Service providers, including banks, often pay compensation for bad service, even when there's no financial loss.

[Deleted User]

illuminutter wrote: »

Service providers, including banks, often pay compensation for bad service, even when there's no financial loss.

Time to let this line of discussion go now, I think. Argue the semantics with the Bank or the Ombudsman, you still won't get any "compo".

illuminutter

What? Because you've lost the argument? "Time to end this"? Who do you think you are? Perhaps someone else can contribute something meaningful.

[Deleted User]

illuminutter wrote: »

What? Because you've lost the argument? "Time to end this"? Who do you think you are?

I've "lost" nothing, just as you will doubtless receive "nothing".

It's pointless to continue this debate since you clearly refuse to accept what numerous posters (not just me) have advised.

illuminutter wrote: »

Perhaps someone else can contribute something meaningful.

You mean simply tell you what you want to hear?

illuminutter

No, I mean if you'd read the MSE report that is the subject if this forum, you'd have known that it's not my hearsay complaint. And it's simply not true that compensation is only paid when there is financial loss. I don't want someone to tell me what I want to hear. I want an informed and helpful repose. I suggest that you stop patronising and insulting me, and allow someone helpful to contribute.

magpiecottage

illuminutter wrote: »

My wife was mis-sold this product. They wildly exaggerated the benefits. But actually it's doing OK, for an investment ISA. So she hasn't actually lost money. So she hasn't suffered 'detriment', and therefore apparently isn't due 'redress'. But shouldn't she get compo for the act of mis-selling anyway?

What was agreed is that customers should receive "redress", by which the FCA means they should be put back into the position they would have been in had the misselling not occurred.

This involves calculating a notional value for the position the customer would have been in.

Nobody can really know what the would have been and, naturally, the customer will want it to be as high as possible whilst the firm will want it to be as low as possible. So either the FCA or FOS specify the way it should be calculated so that arguments about it cannot go on for ever.

The customer does not get all of that notional amount because they will still have some value from the actual investment. So you subtract the actual amount from the notional amount and that is the redress figure.

In your case, subtrating the actual amount from the notional amount would give a negative figure. In other words to get into the position you would have been in had the the misselling not occurred you would have to forfeit part of your investment.

Santander will not force you to pay that forfeit but if you are really determined to be put into the position you would have been I will be pleased to dispose of the requisite amount for you.

illuminutter

Full of it. Do you really think that when the FCA says Santander badly let their customers down, they would allow them to take money off those customers? I suggest you read the MSE report on the FCA review that is the subject of this forum. (See the link at the top of the page.) The word "redress" is not the property of financial advisors.

illuminutter

Full of it. Do you really think that when the FCA says Santander badly let their customers down, they would allow them to take money off those customers? I suggest you read the MSE report on the FCA review that is the subject of this forum. (See the link at the top of the page.) The word "redress" is not the property of financial advisors.