FOS is a Joke

NoOne2

NoOne2 wrote: »

Martin we are disappointed how you always say goto The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).

They have been totally Biased and clearly not read any of the paperwork we sent them, but relied on all paperwork and info the Company sent.

The final decision has no references to any points of law we put or they clearly didn't know what the status of the faulty product was, as it was in our paperwork to say the manufacturer has sent it back.

I did a search about complaints and impartial service the FOS do, and there are tons and tons complaints they haven't acted impartial.


Looks like only way to get justice is to do a Small Claims , which we was going to do first.

So far , the majority if not all have missed what the Topic is about.

So I have quoted it, now please read, Ok

Just incase you still can't read it,

I was asking on views and comments about the FOS and how they can make a decision without the person's ( who raised the case) evidence and confirmation of the fault.

If it suppose to be impartial, then no decision should be made until all information you want them to rely on is in front of them.

Same as any Court of Law would do.

The final decision had no mention of any references or evidence we provided after, as explained.

edit

****the adjudicator stated, doesn't matter if the product is faulty, and , well it our fault for not using the product so warranty time would not have been lost?***

Valli

NoOne2 wrote: »

Martin we are disappointed how you always say goto The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).

.

NoOne2 wrote: »

So far , the majority if not all have missed what the Topic is about.
.

We? Do you mean ALL contributors to this forum?

I'm perfectly happy with the FOS, thank you. They upheld my complaint.

lovinituk

I think the FOS are fair and balanced and they absolutely 100% made the right decision in your case.

NoOne2

Valli wrote: »

We? Do you mean ALL contributors to this forum?

I'm perfectly happy with the FOS, thank you. They upheld my complaint.

Did you read what I posted?

How does what I posted refer to all ?

Did ALL comment here? No,

Good yours was upheld, but does it refer to how this was dealt with No.

Does it comment on why they already made a decision without the paperwork or evidence?

Does it refer to refer to how the adjudicator stated, doesn't matter if the product is faulty, and , well it our fault for not using the product so warranty time would not have been lost? ***Not mentioned in Original post so will update***

This is why a Topic can get mixed up and lost in what is being asked

NoOne2

lovinituk wrote: »

I think the FOS are fair and balanced and they absolutely 100% made the right decision in your case.

So you agree they can make a decision without evidence and paperwork from the person who raised the issue?

lovinituk

NoOne2 wrote: »

So you agree they can make a decision without evidence and paperwork from the person who raised the issue?

I don't believe that happened. You're so confused and muddled you don't know what's going on. As I said, I believe the FOS is fair and balanced and 100% made the right decision in your case.

NoOne2

lovinituk wrote: »

I don't believe that happened. You're so confused and muddled you don't know what's going on. As I said, I believe the FOS is fair and balanced and 100% made the right decision in your case.

Please answer the question.

lovinituk

NoOne2 wrote: »

Please answer the question.

I did answer the question. I don't believe your version of events. It didn't happen the way you claim it did.

cono1717

NoOne2 wrote: »

Do not discriminate my posts, when it was explained, i have disability's and the submitted paperwork was given time to write it, unlike here.

You have all the time in the world to write your posts out here, most of the people that have been answering your posts have said that you are incoherent and we can't understand you. If you need to take time to write things out clearer. Take the time. But don't accuse people that are trying to help you as having a grudge because they don't agree with you.

Ultimately if the FoS didn't need your paperwork then there is a reason for that, you were wrong. Nothing you could have said was going to change that.

If you have a problem with it, and you clearly do. Go to court. The answer on here is not going to change no matter how many people's opinions you dismiss. Would it take Martin Lewis himself to finally convince you I wonder? :money:

neilmcl

OK, how's this. The FOS are not there to judge whether you've had a breach of contract or what remedies you may or may not be due, that's for a small claims court to decide. They are there solely to adjudicate whether your CC co. have acted correctly. They don't need all your "paperwork" or apparent ramblings to do so. They have decided that your CC has indeed acted correctly and appropriately and I can't see any evidence that you've provided to suggest otherwise.