When Banks don't Act on FOS Findings

masonic

Yes, I think there is little chance of this needing to go to an Ombudsman unless Cotta wants more than was offered in December.

EachPenny

Cotta wrote: »

Agreed it's hard to see it not going to an Ombudsman now which as FOS have said will almost certainly not result in an improved outcome. I am still happy with the decision on 18th December but it's the delays since then which is where the issue is. Tomorrow I'll finally find out what the correct protocol is when banks ignore FOS.

When you say "FOS" do you mean anyone other than the Adjudicator you've been dealing with have said this?

That is, the Adjudicator who has spent several weeks trying to discourage you from pushing for the case to be dealt with by an Ombudsman? (because you are unhappy with the way it has been dealt with so far)

I agree with the advice above, seek guidance tomorrow on how best to deal with the post-December 18th nonsense.

Cotta

I just had a good initial conversation with the Manager. I suggested that rather than going to the Ombudsman that perhaps a word with TSB would resolve the issue?

The Manager has agreed to call TSB herself and "mediate" with them, she is looking for the original amount to be paid and is going to ask TSB to make some form of offer for the delays in order to get the file closed off. I should hear back later today.

masonic

Sounds encouraging, although I'll reserve judgement until something actually materialises in your bank account.

eskbanker

Interesting to note from the reference to 'she' that this manager is obviously a different one from the adjudicator's line manager, unless there's been some swift gender reassignment surgery or FOS are enlightened enough not to insist on people identifying one way or the other! Perhaps they should be referring to an ombudsperson....

Anyway, I digress, the adjudicator's line manager did (mostly) seem pragmatic and helpful but a fresh pair of eyes on the case should hopefully result in jaw-dropping disbelief at the way it's been handled thus far, which should be good news for getting it sorted out sooner rather than later!

Cotta

The Manager has called to advise that TSB are not playing ball and has further advised that the case should go to an Ombudsman and I have agreed to this.

masonic

Cotta wrote: »

The Manager has called to advise that TSB are not playing ball and has further advised that the case should go to an Ombudsman and I have agreed to this.

The published decision should make interesting reading! It seems as if the case has already gone to an Ombudsman in essence. It would save a lot of duplication of time and effort if the Manager became the Ombudsman reviewing the case.

eskbanker

Cotta wrote: »

The Manager has called to advise that TSB are not playing ball and has further advised that the case should go to an Ombudsman and I have agreed to this.

I'd be willing to bet that the manager hasn't tried to put the wind up you with tales of how this will probably work out worse for you (and certainly no better)!

It does still beg the question of why TSB didn't formally reject the adjudicator's decision immediately or within 3/4 weeks, rather than apparently simply hoping it would go away, so I can't believe that will reflect well on them.

Presumably the ombudsman will review the case itself and make a decision on its merits but that still leaves the issue of your complaint about the way it's been handled by FOS, which I presume stays with the manager unless or until escalated to the independent assessor?

Cotta

She did say that what's been offered at the moment would be more of a baseline with the Ombudsman rubber stamping it ir recommending an increase. It is only in exceptional situations that an Ombudsman would indicate less.

I was advised that when TSB are aware of Ombudsman involvement they may come through with an offer.

pmduk

How many times did she refer to her colleagues at TSB?