SVS Securities - shut down?

eskbanker

Josl said:

The Financial Ombudsman Service Seems is offering mass blanket award of £250 for inconvenience regardless of circumstances. FOS is not fit for purpose.

They publish their compensation guidelines at https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/expect/compensation-for-distress-or-inconvenience - are you contending that these guidelines are inappropriate or asserting that they're failing to act in accordance with them?

masonic

Josl said:

The Financial Ombudsman Service Seems is offering mass blanket award of £250 for inconvenience regardless of circumstances. FOS is not fit for purpose.

Clearly when a large number of very similar complaints get referred to them, where the impact/frustration is going to be broadly the same for most complainants, a consistent offer is a means of treating each instance even-handedly. It wouldn't surprise me if this consistency was also intended to convey a message to ITI that they should be offering this compensation to everyone with a reasonable complaint. This is what a well managed firm would do. If will obviously cost ITI the compensation and FOS case fee for each complaint they don't settle before it gets to the FOS (I'm assuming they've long since run out of free cases).

That's not to say there haven't been edge cases where there were more severe circumstances and greater compensation awarded. The only way one of those is going to come to light is if ITI disagrees with it, or the complainant communicates it here or elsewhere. There might have been lower awards, although hopefully the £250 represents an assumed level of distress and inconvenience, and the FOS hasn't sought to minimise anyone's experience just because they didn't make a compelling enough complaint.

My2penneth

Once again my shares have disappeared from the ITI accounts..... 

The last time they went AWOL, I reported the problem to ITI...Their answer

"Unfortunately our client portal sometimes generates inaccurate projections of client holdings, hence our management and IT team are investigating and trying to resolve this issue as soon as possible".

This has been an ongoing issue (their own words indicate it has happened previously). I wonder what the FCA thinks about this...I think I will ask them on Monday.

p.s. they are not replying to the FOS' emails.....
.

eskbanker

masonic said:
If will obviously cost ITI the compensation and FOS case fee for each complaint they don't settle before it gets to the FOS (I'm assuming they've long since run out of free cases).

Not necessarily - they get 25 free cases per financial year and they didn't feature in the most recent FOS complaint volumes dataset, which has a threshold of 30, albeit those datasets only cover half-year periods:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78790224/#Comment_78790224

masonic

eskbanker said:

masonic said:
If will obviously cost ITI the compensation and FOS case fee for each complaint they don't settle before it gets to the FOS (I'm assuming they've long since run out of free cases).

Not necessarily - they get 25 free cases per financial year and they didn't feature in the most recent FOS complaint volumes dataset, which has a threshold of 30, albeit those datasets only cover half-year periods:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78790224/#Comment_78790224

Thanks, I missed that post. I find it surprising, although perhaps that is the danger in extrapolating the sentiment here to ex-SVS investors in general.

Sheris

masonic said:

Josl said:

The Financial Ombudsman Service Seems is offering mass blanket award of £250 for inconvenience regardless of circumstances. FOS is not fit for purpose.

Clearly when a large number of very similar complaints get referred to them, where the impact/frustration is going to be broadly the same for most complainants, a consistent offer is a means of treating each instance even-handedly. It wouldn't surprise me if this consistency was also intended to convey a message to ITI that they should be offering this compensation to everyone with a reasonable complaint. This is what a well managed firm would do. If will obviously cost ITI the compensation and FOS case fee for each complaint they don't settle before it gets to the FOS (I'm assuming they've long since run out of free cases).

That's not to say there haven't been edge cases where there were more severe circumstances and greater compensation awarded. The only way one of those is going to come to light is if ITI disagrees with it, or the complainant communicates it here or elsewhere. There might have been lower awards, although hopefully the £250 represents an assumed level of distress and inconvenience, and the FOS hasn't sought to minimise anyone's experience just because they didn't make a compelling enough complaint.

masonic, has yourself been involved in the center of SVS and ITI Capital ?   

masonic

Sheris said:

masonic said:

Josl said:

The Financial Ombudsman Service Seems is offering mass blanket award of £250 for inconvenience regardless of circumstances. FOS is not fit for purpose.

Clearly when a large number of very similar complaints get referred to them, where the impact/frustration is going to be broadly the same for most complainants, a consistent offer is a means of treating each instance even-handedly. It wouldn't surprise me if this consistency was also intended to convey a message to ITI that they should be offering this compensation to everyone with a reasonable complaint. This is what a well managed firm would do. If will obviously cost ITI the compensation and FOS case fee for each complaint they don't settle before it gets to the FOS (I'm assuming they've long since run out of free cases).

That's not to say there haven't been edge cases where there were more severe circumstances and greater compensation awarded. The only way one of those is going to come to light is if ITI disagrees with it, or the complainant communicates it here or elsewhere. There might have been lower awards, although hopefully the £250 represents an assumed level of distress and inconvenience, and the FOS hasn't sought to minimise anyone's experience just because they didn't make a compelling enough complaint.

masonic, has yourself been involved in the center of SVS and ITI Capital ?   

My SVS account was empty by the time they went bust, so I haven't experienced the delights of ITI. However, I had an unpleasant experience many years ago with a glacially slow transfer to Interactive Investor replete with errors, followed by persistent problems and glitches, which ended in an upheld FOS complaint, so I do have sympathy.

johnburman

The Financial Ombudsman Service Seems is offering mass blanket award of £250 for inconvenience regardless of circumstances. FOS is not fit for purpose.

I agree about the FOS, but I got £300.  All one can say is to keep on making the complaints - remember each person may make a complaint for every account that they have.  The FOS may join complaints but that is for them to determine.  

RasputinB

eskbanker said:

[ITI] didn't feature in the most recent FOS complaint volumes dataset, which has a threshold of 30, albeit those datasets only cover half-year periods:

Which is why ITI have been making cash offers tied to non-disclosure agreements?
The "SVS Client Support Group" lists some 63 problem reports which suggests that they had at least that number of members who should have lodged formal complaints to the FOS.
I'd guess that those who complained (and are complaining) directly to the FCA have been the most instrumental in persuading ITI to improve.

johnburman

As ever RasputinB you have hit the nail on the head

Those who complain to the FCA and FOS and go through the lengthy snail like FOS process get compensation. Obviously no NDA or similar. 

But who would deal with ITI directly? Do they ever settle for more money than the FOS award or do it more quickly?