TSB - Has anyone gone to the Ombudsman?

masonic

OceanSound wrote: »

Looks like I was shafted by the Ombudsman when I complained about Paypal. Here's an extract from my complaint form:

It's very hard to determine whether you were shafted or not without seeing the full complaint and response. If the complaint was considered vexatious for example, then it can be rejected in this way and the firm would not need to pay the usual fee it is charged for use of the service.

OceanSound

masonic wrote: »

It's very hard to determine whether you were shafted or not without seeing the full complaint and response. If the complaint was considered vexatious for example, then it can be rejected in this way and the firm would not need to pay the usual fee it is charged for use of the service.

No, it wasn't considered to be vexatious.* So, it should've at least partially (partly) been upheld.i.e. the 'not responding within time limit' part upheld.

*-I can post a link to the full decision if you want.

masonic

OceanSound wrote: »

No, it wasn't determined to be vexatious.* So, it should've at least partially (partly) been upheld.i.e. the 'not responding within time limit' part upheld.

*-I can post a link to the full decision if you want.

Please post the link, I'd be interested in reading it.

I've made 2 complaints to the FOS in the past 5 years, both successful and on both occasions I was awarded considerably more than I asked for in my original complaint to the organisation. In the case of the complaint against TSB, I experienced (in my view) fewer problems than the average customer. It is noteworthy that the FOS has taken on a large number of new staff in anticipation of TSB complaints and they have been briefed specifically in relation to these complaints. The bar for upholding a complaint about the TSB IT problems seems to be set quite low.

masonic

In the interim, I've had a browse of Ombudsman decisions and located 3 in the last 5 years against Paypal in which part of the complaint was that a final response was not received and in each case reasons were given as to why the adjudicator/investigator did not uphold that part of the complaint. So these are the traps to avoid if you wish to successfully complain about a lack of a timely final response:

#1 Mr M. (don't refer your complaint to the FOS too early)

Under the rules that apply to this service, we may begin to deal with a complaint once six weeks have passed from the date the consumer complained to the financial business whether or not the financial business has provided its response to the consumer. Mr M referred his complaint to us shortly before that point, because he was using the internal target final response time of four weeks that PayPal had given him when acknowledging his complaint. PayPal then responded to our enquiries in the normal way and I can't see that it has failed to comply with ombudsman service guidance.

#2 Mr B. (make sure your contact details are up to date)

From what I can see of how PayPal handled Mr B's complaint it was in a timely manner. The problem arose here when PayPal sent its final response letter a defunct email address. However, it has shown that it used the email address identified as the primary email address out of several email addresses provided. Although it had initially communicated to Mr B
about his complaint on a different email address, I do not think that it has acted unfairly or unreasonably by writing to him on an email address that he had provided and presumably at some point indicated as a primary address. It seems to me that part of the problem with communication here has arisen from the fact Mr B closed his PayPal account.

#3 Miss F. (keep hold of any correspondence from TSB asking for extra time to consider your complaint)

I've considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what's fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. Having done so, I think our adjudicator was right to say that PayPal hadn't done anything sufficiently wrong that it now needs to take remedial action, or pay Miss F compensation. I'm satisfied that PayPal acted within its own rights under its User Agreement when it took action on her account, and I'm also satisfied that when Miss F complained it did send her a final response, albeit she says she didn't receive this.

OceanSound

masonic wrote: »

Failure to consider a complaint within 8 weeks is itself grounds for a complaint to be upheld.

masonic wrote: »

In the interim, I've had a browse of Ombudsman decisions and located 3 in the last 5 years against Paypal in which part of the complaint was that a final response was not received and in each case reasons were given as to why the adjudicator/investigator did not uphold that part of the complaint. So these are the traps to avoid if you wish to successfully complain about a lack of a timely final response:
#1 Mr M. (don't refer your complaint to the FOS too early)
#2 Mr B. (make sure your contact details are up to date)
#3 Miss F. (keep hold of any correspondence from TSB asking for extra time to consider your complaint)

How about posting decisions where the FOS decided that 'Failure to consider a complaint within 8 weeks is itself grounds for a complaint to be upheld.'

or indeed the precise rule within the FCA handbook (which the FOS is meant to abide by) where it says 'failure to consider a complaint within 8 weeks is itself grounds for a complaint to be upheld'.

masonic

OceanSound wrote: »

How about posting decisions where the FOS decided that 'Failure to consider a complaint within 8 weeks is itself grounds for a complaint to be upheld.'

or indeed the precise rule within the FCA handbook (which the FOS is meant to abide by) where it says 'failure to consider a complaint within 8 weeks is itself grounds for a complaint to be upheld'.

How about doing your own dirty work

Only decisions that are rejected by the customer or business are escalated to the Ombudsman. As such, all complaints that were upheld by an adjudicator or investigator that were accepted by the complainant and business are not published. So we consumers do not have access to most of the upheld complaints.

The FOS does not require there to have been a specific rule within the handbook broken to uphold a customer complaint. The FOS, in its own words: "look at everything that's happened - and then take a step back and decide what's fair overall" It is clear from the cases above that failure of the business to respond within 8 weeks was considered as grounds for upholding, but in each case the Ombudsman was not satisfied this actually occurred.

Perhaps having a better understanding of the service and the way it considers complaints would have helped you in your case.

In my time posting to this forum, I've discussed a number of specific complaints in various threads and helped with their construction. Not following the correct process or not bringing adequate emphasis on the salient points can lead to an unfavourable outcome. For those considering following my lead and complaining to the FOS about TSB, my message is clear - don't be discouraged by one poster who had a bad outcome and has some statistics from a year ago suggesting there is little hope of success.

Cotta

I referred this to the ombudsman, they called to advise I will know the outcome within four weeks. They asked what resolution I wanted and I said simply to access my account.