RBS Packaged bank account rejected by Ombudsman
Options
Comments
-
He’d rightly be laughed out of the room if he took this to the press. He bought a service, kept buying it for decades, and then wants his money back. Not going to happen.
Normally I'd agree about the press response, but have you seen the nonsense story MSE posted up yesterday about someone who owed First Utility money? https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/energy/2018/03/my-energy-company-got-my-refund-wrong-then-chased-me-with-debt-collectors-because-i-owed-3p
Some elements (and they are sadly the majority) within the modern media aren't too bothered about what the facts of the case are, and they just love bashing banks and utility companies!0 -
ValiantSon wrote: »Normally I'd agree about the press response, but have you seen the nonsense story MSE posted up yesterday about someone who owed First Utility money? https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/energy/2018/03/my-energy-company-got-my-refund-wrong-then-chased-me-with-debt-collectors-because-i-owed-3p
Some elements (and they are sadly the majority) within the modern media aren't too bothered about what the facts of the case are, and they just love bashing banks and utility companies!
OP .....Try and see what happens0 -
....the end result being that they agreed that RBS were correct as they wrote to me at 3 points over the last 15 years giving me all of the information I required to either activate the policies or change the account....
@Op: If you didn't activate the policies you were not provided a service. So, it's NOT THE SAME as ordering a cake from the bakers, having it delivered, then not eating it.
If you don't agree with the ombudsman's decision you don't have to accept it. You can try joining, for example, 'Which consumer' who may be able to help. They provide advise for members.
Apart from that put your money where your mouth is and go down the legal action route, which can be quite complex. You would need a very good lawyer, as the establishment will be rather shy to admit to ANOTHER mis-selling scandal, especially since we've just about started to forget the PPI one.
BTW, did the £14 charges appear on your statement?.
I took a couple of cases to the Ombudsman about transfer fees charged by Halifax for incoming payments from a foreign bank. These charges never appeared on my statement. Adjudicator and Ombudsman not once used the word 'hidden', and always tried to skirt around it. In the end they made Halifax settle with compo. Mind you, I've had a couple of atrocious decisions (one about Paypal in particular).
Before hiring the big guns (lawyers) you may be able to bring an action against RBS in the small claims court (may be worth asking someone like Which consumer about this). Ombudsman service is a highly questionable service, it's recently come under the spotlight by several institutions (not just the media); Have a look:
http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/news/mps-demand-assurances-after-undercover-fos-doc/a1101080#i=1
http://www.business-standard.com/article/reuters/uk-complaints-body-accused-of-bias-in-favour-of-banks-118031301430_1.html
https://ombudsman-problems.com/2018/03/15/fos-investigated-by-undercover-c4-dispatches-reporter/0 -
OceanSound wrote: »@Op: If you didn't activate the policies you were not provided a service. So, it's NOT THE SAME as ordering a cake from the bakers, having it delivered, then not eating it.
This is nonsense.
The OP paid for a service that he did not use. The fact that he didn't use it doesn't alter the fact that he paid for access to a service and got the access to that service he paid for, and he could have used it. His non-use of the service is his choice, just like it is someone's choice not to eat a cake they've ordered, when they could have eaten it.
The analogy was a good one and your analysis is flawed.0 -
Utter garbage.This is nonsense.
The OP paid for a service that he did not use. The fact that he didn't use it doesn't alter the fact that he paid for access to a service and got the access to that service he paid for, and he could have used it. His non-use of the service is his choice, just like it is someone's choice not to eat a cake they've ordered, when they could have eaten it.
The analogy was a good one and your analysis is flawed.
For an analogy to be an analogy the source and target elements have to match closely. You are comparing a cake to an insurance service (which wasn't activated). Presumably, when the cake arrives at his house, he would see it. There is no activation.
The whole point of activation is to give the customer the opportunity to become aware that he is being provided the service. Without activation he could not have made use of the service. This is not the case with the cake!
The analogy offered is as useful as a chocolate teapot, so, your buddy would be doing us all a favour if he chose his analogies more carefully in the future. Put it this way, I don't think 2 'thank you's' below the post will save the day, even if he/you liked it to.0 -
OceanSound wrote: »@Op: If you didn't activate the policies you were not provided a service. So, it's NOT THE SAME as ordering a cake from the bakers, having it delivered, then not eating it.
If you don't agree with the ombudsman's decision you don't have to accept it. You can try joining, for example, 'Which consumer' who may be able to help. They provide advise for members.
Apart from that put your money where your mouth is and go down the legal action route, which can be quite complex. You would need a very good lawyer, as the establishment will be rather shy to admit to ANOTHER mis-selling scandal, especially since we've just about started to forget the PPI one.
BTW, did the £14 charges appear on your statement?.
I took a couple of cases to the Ombudsman about transfer fees charged by Halifax for incoming payments from a foreign bank. These charges never appeared on my statement. Adjudicator and Ombudsman not once used the word 'hidden', and always tried to skirt around it. In the end they made Halifax settle with compo. Mind you, I've had a couple of atrocious decisions (one about Paypal in particular).
Before hiring the big guns (lawyers) you may be able to bring an action against RBS in the small claims court (may be worth asking someone like Which consumer about this). Ombudsman service is a highly questionable service, it's recently come under the spotlight by several institutions (not just the media); Have a look:
http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/news/mps-demand-assurances-after-undercover-fos-doc/a1101080#i=1
http://www.business-standard.com/article/reuters/uk-complaints-body-accused-of-bias-in-favour-of-banks-118031301430_1.html
https://ombudsman-problems.com/2018/03/15/fos-investigated-by-undercover-c4-dispatches-reporter/OceanSound wrote: »Utter garbage.
For an analogy to be an analogy the source and target elements have to match closely. You are comparing a cake to an insurance service (which wasn't activated). Presumably, when the cake arrives at his house, he would see it. There is no activation.
The whole point of activation is to give the customer the opportunity to become aware that he is being provided the service. Without activation he could not have made use of the service. This is not the case with the cake!
The analogy offered is as useful as a chocolate teapot, so, your buddy would be doing us all a favour if he chose his analogies more carefully in the future. Put it this way, I don't think 2 'thank you's' below the post will save the day, even if he/you liked it to.
Your advice is both nonsense and likely to result in the OP incurring significant costs for no gain should they be foolish enough to follow it. Unless they have not revealed any details (and they have had plenty of opportunity to do so) there was no mis-selling. Encouraging them to pursue the issue is dreadful advice.
They need to accept that they paid for something and didn't make use of it. Maybe in future they will be more discriminating about how they choose to spend their money, but ultimately it remains their choice and the information needed to make that choice was provided to them.0 -
-
Can someone please advise, I bought some magic beans and they aren't turning into a magic beanstalk?
Who can I claim for compensation because the boy who sold me them swore they would work.Save £12k in 2019 -0 -
Did they cost over £100 and did you pay by credit card? If so, you may be able to make a claim under section 75 of the Gullible Consumer Act 1974....AstroTurtle wrote: »Can someone please advise, I bought some magic beans and they aren't turning into a magic beanstalk?
Who can I claim for compensation because the boy who sold me them swore they would work.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.8K Spending & Discounts
- 235.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards