Financial Ombudsman Condones miss leading, confusing and contradictory correspondence from Banks

Roythompson

Financial Ombudsman Service condones that it is acceptable for banks to send out confusing and contradictory correspondence to their customers with regard to non advised critical illness policy and then inform the customer about the charges pertaining to advice given by their representative. Has anyone else come across this happening to them.

[Deleted User]

Not enough information to say.

Bermonia

Your post doesn’t make sense... you will need to provide a lot more information if you’re looking for reasoned comments

Nasqueron

You complained
Your bank rejected your complaint
The FOS said the evidence you presented didn't support your accusations so rejected it

This does not mean the FOS supports the banks, lots and lots of PPI complaints were paid out because of the FOS but their complaints had merit

dunstonh

The first post is a bit confusing.

Financial Ombudsman Service condones that it is acceptable for banks to send out confusing and contradictory correspondence to their customers with regard to non advised critical illness policy and then inform the customer about the charges pertaining to advice given by their representative

There are no explicit charges normally on a critical illness cover policy. Just the premium. There are some multi-segment plans that may have an explicit premium or some very old legacy plans but most of the banks have none.

Then you say it is non-advised. In which case, you cant have charges for advice on non-advised sales.