The Financial Ombudsman

[Deleted User]

I'm guessing the "tone" of the OP will be significantly worsened when the Ombudsman inevitably sides with the adjudicator and fully and finally rejects his complaint.

In the meantime, I think attacking other users of this forum because they are not giving the answers the OP wants to hear is a futile exercise.

Corky_Buczek

I hate to tell you but I'm fairly resigned to the fact the Ombudsman will not change his decision.

I have attacked one user because of his smugness and his patronising tone, something which he replicates on almost every thread he seems to posts on.

I'm happy to discuss or debate the original merits of my post with anyone who doesn't make rather grand assumptions about me.

societys_child

Your main gripe seems to be that over 10 years ago, you bought something that you now think was too expensive.
You had 14 days to cancel the policy, you didn't . . .

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

magpiecottage

Corky_Buczek wrote: »

You haven't seen the case file

No we haven't,

However, the adjudicator at the Financial Ombudsman Service has. Their view is that your complaint should not be upheld.

Corky_Buczek wrote: »

In 2005, I transferred a balance from another card and at this point they said it was taken out over the phone.

So in 2005 you started getting a premium of £40 a month appearing on your statements.

Why did it take you until 2016 to query such a large amount being charged to your account each month?

Sn awkward question but a fair one.

Corky_Buczek

I paid for something I believed was mandatory and was extraordinary poor value. I subsequently found the former was not the case. Hence I tried to claim it back.

If my claim is unsuccessful - and that looks very likely - its not the end of the world although I maintain that one of the main reasons given to me by the Ombudsman is breathtakingly bizarre given the actual evidence I supplied him which indicates the exact opposite of his conclusion.

In the grand scheme of things my disagreement with the Ombudsman is not really that profound.

(Text by MSE Forum Team)

magpiecottage

So you have told FOS that you had a credit card from 2003 to 2005 without insurance but you then took it out in 2005 because for some reason you thought it was mandatory.

I can see why the adjudicator has a problem believing that.

Corky_Buczek

No thats not the case. In 2005 I transferred a Ccard balance from Amex to HBOS. I had never done this before. This is when it was added. In my naivety I though if I wanted to do that, the PPI came with it.

In 2008 when I was made aware that you could transfer without PPI, I immediately went somewhere else.

Since then I've made sure that I no longer have PPI although as I no longer run financially with a credit card balance that is academic.

The reason that it took me so long to claim, is that I din't realise I could until late 2014 and it took me a year to get off my backside to do something about it.

magpiecottage

Corky_Buczek wrote: »

In my naivety I though if I wanted to do that, the PPI came with it.

Putting myself in the adjudicator's shoes, I have to remember that I am an independent arbitrator, not a consumer champion.

So I have to ask myself why you thought that. If it is because the bank told you something that was untrue or misleading then it would be at fault. If it is simply that you made an assumption (or a guess) that was wrong then that might be unfortunate but it is not the bank's fault.

And if the bank is not at fault then it is not reasonable to expect it to meet the cost of putting things right.

-taff

You may be under the impression this is a support forum. It isn't. It's an information forum.
If you re-read Dunstons postings as purely information, I think you'll see it's not a smug tone at all, it's just purely factual.