When Banks don't Act on FOS Findings

Cotta

eskbanker wrote: »

This is why it's important for the FOS to set expectations, both for you and TSB, by clearly stating in their adjudication that payment must be made by a specific date and that any rejection by TSB needed to have been made by another (or the same) specific date. I can't recall if these dates were ever clearly spelt out in writing.

They'll possibly ask, but that doesn't mean FOS have to accept any such request! I'd expect that the manager's intervention last week to grant them another week wouldn't have been on the basis that this sets a precedent and that it can just keep rolling on, especially when the adjudicator (presumably under pressure from her manager) has repeatedly been keen to close it off asap.

Possibly but unlikely IMHO. As pointed out above, further delay may play into your hands, frustrating though it undoubtedly is.

I think that ship sailed long ago! As suggested earlier, personally I'd frame it as advising FOS that TSB haven't paid up rather than chasing as such, although chasing would hardly be unreasonable....

Agreed with everything you have said, however do you feel this delay by TSB is intentional? I was edging towards giving them the benefit of the doubt in relation to having forgot about it.

eskbanker

Cotta wrote: »

Agreed with everything you have said, however do you feel this delay by TSB is intentional? I was edging towards giving them the benefit of the doubt in relation to having forgot about it.

No idea to be honest, but I don't think there's any realistic chance of them having forgotten about it!

Apart from their (self-inflicted) heavy workload still arising from tidying up the mess of last April, my suspicion is that the £500 compensation figure (and/or the total once added to tranche 1) will be needing extra internal TSB authorisation, based on last week's comment "your compensation has not been approved by TSB from a senior level as of yet", so it may be that there is some resistance further up the TSB food chain when compared with the normal run of the mill settlements. That's their problem though, and if they felt that they needed more time then they should have asked FOS for it before now....

Jakg

I've been quietly reading this with interest.

Personally, I would risk the escalation - you might get less (although I suspect that's a threat, not a reasoned opinion), but worst case I doubt it would be much less. But currently you have nothing!

Cotta

I think escalation will be the only solution although I can sit tight for the rest of this week.

My partner feels I should be reverting back to FOS demanding that either this is escalated to the Ombudsman or TSB pay immediately with something extra for the delay. I do not think this would work and may in fact work against me (been seen as too greedy/compensation hunter).

masonic

I still don't think you should be demanding this is escalated to an Ombudsman. You should demand the Adjudicator sets a hard deadline for TSB to formally accept of reject the decision, after which time they will have been deemed to reject it and it will be passed to an Ombudsman and the subsequent decision will become enforceable through the small claims court, using bailiffs if necessary.

You might also ask the Adjudicator to advise on the best wording for a Notice Before Action you are planning to draft in anticipation of this enforceable decision.

Nobody seems to be considering that the Ombudsman might equally increase the amount awarded.

Cotta

masonic wrote: »

I still don't think you should be demanding this is escalated to an Ombudsman. You should demand the Adjudicator sets a hard deadline for TSB to formally accept of reject the decision, after which time they will have been deemed to reject it and it will be passed to an Ombudsman and the subsequent decision will become enforceable through the small claims court, using bailiffs if necessary.

You might also ask the Adjudicator to advise on the best wording for a Notice Before Action you are planning to draft in anticipation of this enforceable decision.

Nobody seems to be considering that the Ombudsman might equally increase the amount awarded.

I think the adjudicator has outlined an Ombudsman verdict could be less favourable than their own offer. This was even made clear to me when I was reluctant to accept the offer.

I'm keen not to go to the Ombudsman, however this weekend we're moving into week 5, how much harder does the deadline need to be?

masonic

Cotta wrote: »

I think the adjudicator has outlined an Ombudsman verdict could be less favourable than their own offer. This was even made clear to me when I was reluctant to accept the offer.

It could be less favourable, identical, or more favourable. All that can be summised from the Adjudicator's focus on 'less favourable' is that she wants to discourage you. That could be for altruistic reasons (aside: :rotfl:), or she could be covering her behind. It's worth noting the FOS will look very bad if this gets into the public domain, and Ombudsman decisions are all published. One way to make it less bad is to come down on TSB like a ton of bricks so that other firms aren't encouraged to frustrate the process at every opportunity in future, like TSB has done in this case.

But for an Ombudsman to be correctly primed, it needs to be TSB who causes this case to darken their doorstep.

I'm keen not to go to the Ombudsman, however this weekend we're moving into week 5, how much harder does the deadline need to be?

There is no deadline at the moment, based on what you've shared with us. That's the problem - complete incompetence being taken full advantage of by TSB.

Cotta

I received the following email from FOS today:


Dear Mr. Cotta,

Your complaint has now been closed off as you have accepted our recommendations in relation to TSB.

Kind Regards
FOS


I checked my bank account, however the money has not been sent across. The compensation is due to be transferred to me electronically as TSB are experiencing issues posting a cheque (as per before Christmas).


On the deadline, FOS gave three weeks for TSB to action although the hint on the phone was that the turnaround would be fast. As we now creep close to 5 weeks surely this is past a reasonable timeframe for TSB to have actioned this by even if FOS has not been specific with a deadline?

eskbanker

Ridiculous!

I'd reply to the email stating that closure is premature given that:

1. The FOS adjudicator verbally advised that TSB were unlikely to accept her decision.
2. No payment has yet been received.

Given the nature of everything that's gone before, this complaint can only be closed off once actual resolution has been achieved, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to insist that the complaint is kept open until it's actually sorted out one way or another.

While doing so, I'd also take the opportunity of asking FOS for a definitive statement on how long they have given TSB to make payment, as it's not in anyone's interests to let this drag on even further....

Cotta

I'm going to draft an email shortly, the only thing I can think of is that my case has breached an SLA.

On the subject of the FOS deadline I'm worried that something vague has been sent by FOS that as Masonic indicated TSB are taking advantage of. I cannot imagine a deadline would have been above 4 weeks.