When Banks don't Act on FOS Findings

Cotta

xylophone wrote: »

Perhaps TSB is hoping for just that?

They can't possibly see any point in me as a customer any longer.

eskbanker

xylophone wrote: »

You say that TSB has already been referred to FCA in respect of the system failure affecting all customers.

This is a matter affecting a particular customer that the Adjudicator has signally failed to resolve either to her or the customer's satisfaction.

TSB provided this customer with a product ( a bank account).


Does it perform as he was led to expect? I'd say the answer is a resounding negative.

Has the associated service been of an acceptable standard and as he was led to expect? Absolutely not.

It seems that the adjudicator can do nothing more in the face of TSB's incompetence and intransigence.

Therefore it is worth referring to the Adjudicator's superior and thence to the FCA?

Yes, I can see the argument that TSB should be referred to the FCA, but to me it should specifically be for its apparent unwillingness and/or inability to implement FOS's recommendations, rather than lack of compliance with Outcome 5 (which could be argued by most of their customers).

Cotta

eskbanker wrote: »

Yes, I can see the argument that TSB should be referred to the FCA, but to me it should specifically be for its apparent unwillingness and/or inability to implement FOS's recommendations, rather than lack of compliance with Outcome 5 (which could be argued by most of their customers).

Reporting to FOS won't help my case.

masonic

eskbanker wrote: »

Yes, I can see the argument that TSB should be referred to the FCA, but to me it should specifically be for its apparent unwillingness and/or inability to implement FOS's recommendations, rather than lack of compliance with Outcome 5 (which could be argued by most of their customers).

Even then, the correct process is for the customer to obtain a court order legally enforcing the FOS decision. This is easiest with a monetary claim because the court can instruct bailiffs to recover the debt if it isn't paid. Presumably for something like this the business could be held in contempt of court and sanctioned until the matter was resolved.

xylophone

They can't possibly see any point in me as a customer any longer.

But surely that is not the point?

You are currently their customer and have been throughout this fiasco and they have failed in their obligations to you.

They have also failed to comply with the Adjudicator's decision in a timely fashion/at all and on top of that are failing in their duties as set out by their Regulator?

Cotta

xylophone wrote: »

But surely that is not the point?

You are currently their customer and have been throughout this fiasco and they have failed in their obligations to you.

They have also failed to comply with the Adjudicator's decision in a timely fashion/at all and on top of that are failing in their duties as set out by their Regulator?

I think they have the right to close my account. TSB have advised the adjudicator that accepting the £500 and paying it washes their hands off what happens now, they seem to think current action is goodwill only.

Cotta

TSB have issued a communication to the adjudicator:

1. The address has been corrected and a new debit card and PIN will be with me within 10 working days.

2. The Referral bonus of £75 will be paid to me and the person who referred me.

3. TSB have advised that if I call them again they will attempt to fix the issue with my account that is preventing me from withdrawing funds electronically.

TSB will be making no further offers.

JuicyJesus

Cotta wrote: »

TSB will be making no further offers.

Holy god they're bad.

I'm honestly amazed this hasn't yet proceeded to Ombudsman's decision stage. They don't, or shouldn't, have the opportunity to say they disagree with the decision but also won't implement it.

Something has gone terribly, terribly wrong with TSB's complaint handling.

Cotta

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Holy god they're bad.

I'm honestly amazed this hasn't yet proceeded to Ombudsman's decision stage. They don't, or shouldn't, have the opportunity to say they disagree with the decision but also won't implement it.

Something has gone terribly, terribly wrong with TSB's complaint handling.

The adjudicator has said that as £500 was in TSB's view very high end coupled with the fact they are now "being bound over to pay the referral bonus" there is no scope to offer anything further.

JuicyJesus

Cotta wrote: »

The adjudicator has said that as £500 was in TSB's view very high end coupled with the fact they are now "being bound over to pay the referral bonus" there is no scope to offer anything further.

And that request is for the Ombudsman to decide.

Personally I think FOS should be a bit stronger to them - do they object to the decision to the level of wanting an Ombudsman's final or not? If they object, do that; if they don't, they need to implement the adjudicator's decision immediately.

They're taking the p*ss.