When Banks don't Act on FOS Findings

eskbanker

On the subject of acceptable timescales, reading back a bit, it really jumps out to me how the adjudicator's attitude to urgency differs markedly according to whether she's pressurising you....

Cotta wrote: »

the adjudicator did advise today that she wanted everything closed by tomorrow.

Cotta wrote: »

Can we close this off today?

Cotta wrote: »

We really need to get your long running case closed off today.

Cotta wrote: »

can you advise today if this meets with your approval?

....or indulging TSB:

Cotta wrote: »

I have instructed TSB to pay £500 compensation and a suitable level of interest. You will now need to be patient and await its arrival.

Cotta wrote: »

it could be February before any movement happens (I am not saying it will be this long). I am inclined to agree with TSB on this, any payment to you at this stage cannot be deemed late.

[...]

At present you will just need to show more patience, if TSB have not paid you by 11th of February, feel free to contact me then.

Cotta

I just asked about a deadline and what happens next, below was the response:


Dear Cotta,

We would allow our colleagues in TSB 3 weeks to action our requests.

In relation to your request to refer this to the Ombudsman, you much first allow the business the opportunity to action my requests. Secondly there is no guarantee that they will necessary act on an Ombudsman request, so for example if the Ombudsman agrees with my finding but decides to enforce compensation in the region of £100, giving the business 3 weeks to pay this within. At the end of the 3 weeks from the feedback I have had from TSB there is no guarantee of them actioning the request, have you thought about what you will seek from here?

As previously advised, I will contact you in due course.

Kind Regards
FOS

masonic

What a load of rubbish. This couldn't have possibly been written by someone who works within the FOS, or if it was, they certainly shouldn't have been given any responsibility for complaint handling (perhaps working on reception would be a more suitable role). I really think this is the time to start a separate complaint about the FOS.

eskbanker

Cotta, did you actually ask the adjudicator to escalate to the ombudsman and if so, on what basis and with what objective in mind?

To me, this is a logical next step if (and only if) you disagree with her decision that was communicated to TSB last month.

If you're (understandably) unhappy with her performance thus far then I agree with masonic that this is worth complaining about, but as a separate issue from resolving the core TSB complaint.

Cotta

eskbanker wrote: »

Cotta, did you actually ask the adjudicator to escalate to the ombudsman and if so, on what basis and with what objective in mind?

To me, this is a logical next step if (and only if) you disagree with her decision that was communicated to TSB last month.

If you're (understandably) unhappy with her performance thus far then I agree with masonic that this is worth complaining about, but as a separate issue from resolving the core TSB complaint.

No I just asked about TSB's timeframe to act on the recommendations, I am still hoping they will act in good faith.

jamets

Cotta wrote: »

they feel that the missing interest on top of this to be “taking the biscuit”.

Unprofessional. If I said something like that to a client I'd be out of a job. Get this woman away from your case and request that someone else handles it from now on. I'd have absolutely no time for this idiot any more.

ffacoffipawb

jamets wrote: »

Unprofessional. If I said something like that to a client I'd be out of a job. Get this woman away from your case and request that someone else handles it from now on. I'd have absolutely no time for this idiot any more.

I am beginning to wonder if this adjudicator is related to Mr Bean or Benny from Crossroads.

InA

I have skimmed this thread and was very sorry to hear about your ongoing saga.

I have dealt with the FOS on a previous occasion (complaint against a big bank), and found the service to be completely incompetent, in precisely the way you have described.

I had six months of my time wasted in dealing with the adjudicator who requested documents, evidence and information etc. only to misinterpret or ignore it all when she made her decision.

My case was escalated to an Ombudsman, who produced a very reasonable sounding judgment (which might sound fair to a bystander providing they did not have sight of the evidence or details of the complaint); except that it was wholly based on the adjudicator's misinterpretation of the evidence, and so made "findings" which were not actually true. Even the bank had not had the audacity to contest my complaint on the fallacious reasoning concocted by the Ombudsman / FOS.

Prior to the Ombudsman's decision I had also challenged the fact that the adjudicator had misinterpreted or ignored relevant evidence, and I supplied further evidence to prove this. The Ombudsman took the same route as the adjudicator by selectively quoting from the new evidence in such a way as to change its meaning.

At the end of it all, I was left with the distinct impression that the FOS was corrupt when it came to the big banks, and the whole process had proved to be unnecessarily time consuming / stressful. This all happened before the Dispatches expose on how the FOS was run (on Channel 4).

https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/news-parliament-2017/financial-ombudsman-dispatches-chairs-statement-17-19/

I had an issue as of result of TSB's IT problems, but had no confidence in the FOS. Given that TSB had waived the time limit, I was reassured that TSB would definitely resolve my complaint as I would be open to take it to the FOS if they didn't.

It took a long time but TSB not only fixed the issue, they also compensated me for essentially just allowing them to fix the problems in their own time (a sum I found too generous and was not expecting).

It seems to me that most of the hassle you have had to contend with has been caused by the FOS. IMO, they should be the ones to compensate you for the lost time and effort, although I acknowledge that's not how it works.


Anyway, hope it works out for you, although I wouldn't put too much faith in the Ombudsman reaching a better decision (unless things have changed since the parliamentary review).

Cotta

A response from the adjudicator with an intervention from her Manager, I suspect this is creeping close to the Ombudsman's office but is this likely to be a good or bad outcome for me?

Dear Mr. Cotta,

Just to advise you that as of today 9th of January we are exactly 3 weeks and 1 day on from your acceptance of my recommendations. I have spoken to my colleague in TSB and I do not sense that an move on their part is imminent. They have advised that there has not been a true three weeks as we must factor in the Christmas period and the clock should only start running from January 7th. We are in the predicament where (a) they may let this run to the Ombudsman or (b) will suggest a negotiated reduction from my offer, is the latter something you would look at?

I have spoken to my Manager on this who was looking for an update and he feels that yesterday was enough time for TSB to act, however he has suggested an additional week’s grace for TSB. My Manager has also mentioned that if this second deadline is ignored by TSB (as it was in tranche 1 back in August), you may be looking at an additional amount on top of what I recommended in tranche 2. Is this the case and if so what are you thinking of? I would have to go back to TSB with this figure and then go to the Ombudsman, either way this process is looking at running a little bit longer yet – please exercise patience.

Regards

FOS

eskbanker

Cotta wrote: »

They have advised that there has not been a true three weeks as we must factor in the Christmas period and the clock should only start running from January 7th.

Once again this adjudicator is kow-towing to her "colleagues" - it's up to FOS to set a deadline and TSB to adhere to it or face the consequences!

Cotta wrote: »

We are in the predicament where (a) they may let this run to the Ombudsman or (b) will suggest a negotiated reduction from my offer, is the latter something you would look at?

If she's once again subtly trying to intimidate you, don't fall for it!

Cotta wrote: »

I have spoken to my Manager on this who was looking for an update and he feels that yesterday was enough time for TSB to act, however he has suggested an additional week’s grace for TSB

A sensible compromise, the manager as ever being the one with the fully-functioning brain cells....

Cotta wrote: »

My Manager has also mentioned that if this second deadline is ignored by TSB (as it was in tranche 1 back in August), you may be looking at an additional amount on top of what I recommended in tranche 2. Is this the case and if so what are you thinking of?

I don't know why she's asking that and would recommend you ignore the question - IMHO everyone should wait and see what happens rather than speculating at this stage....