We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Ombudsman reply re endowment mis-selling

Over the last 2 years I have asked the FOS to look at our mis-sold endowment. We are outside time limits to claim but have evidenced what we believe are 'exceptional circumstances' that would mean that the 'time bar' does not apply.
The ombudsman's latest reply asked if we wanted them (The FOS) to contact the bank, send the bank our evidence...
'for them to consider whether they will grant consent to our service considering your complaint'.
Is this how it works? the bank have to give permission for the ombudsman to consider the complaint...that seems totally at odds with what I would expect.

Thanks

Graham

Comments

  • Nearlyold
    Nearlyold Posts: 2,387 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    I would guess FOS have decided your request to overturn a valid time bar will not be granted and thus your only option is to plead with the bank. NB you've posted in the wrong forum - your issue is not a credit file one.
  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 10,937 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    The time bars are legal limits to prevent complaints about products going on forever or even being re-run over and over whenever claims firms decide to try a new line. You would have had multiple letters and warnings about the endowment and would have agreed to all the terms and conditions when you took it out, if your complaint is time barred and the FOS are just asking the bank then the time bar was implemented correctly and you'd be replying on bank goodwill to look at it again

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

  • Sorry it's the wrong forum (first time posting)... thanks for the replies it wasn't a standard claim re the policy... we had claimed on ill health years ago and FOS rejected it under terms of the policy.... we weren't in a position to follow up because of ill health. Just wondered why they had to seek consent.

    thanks again, I don't think I need to repost in the correct forum I think you've covered it.

    Gra
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.3K Life & Family
  • 258.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.