SVS Securities - shut down?

johnburman

I was 

send the Notice just to 'warn' them. take a view whether to enforce if necessary. and it's a disgrace we are even talking about this and that a regulated body is not comply with a FOS finding 

RasputinB

Further ombudsman decisions -
DRN-3784959 - £500 D&I, ITI offered £125
DRN-3787325 - £350 D&I, ITI offered £75
"..complaint handling is not something I can consider because of the rules this service operates within. These rules, known as DISP rules are laid down by the Financial Conduct Authority (‘FCA’). They aren’t optional – we must abide by them. The relevant rule here is DISP 2.3.1. which states that we can only look at ‘regulated activities’. DISP 2.3.1. lists examples of regulated activities but complaint handling isn’t listed as a regulated activity. So, Mr and Mrs H’s comment about the handling of their complaint isn’t something I can address as complaint handling is not something that I can consider."
DRN-3609353 - £450 D&I, ITI initially offered £150

I think that makes 34 published Ombudsman Decisions in 2022.

johnburman

As ever interesting. 

your views on the complaint handling exclusion?

seems odd to me. What about the TCF (treating clients fairly) obligation

RasputinB

johnburman said:

your views on the complaint handling exclusion?

I'd have to search through my notes but I am pretty sure that other ombudsmen have awarded D&I which included an element for poor complaint handling.
If that is the case then I think that this recent "cop out" by an ombusdman is unreasonable and unfair.
From what I have seen I think that the FOS process, in general, is both biased and unfair. They have received plenty of criticism but appear to just continue as before. I found it useful to accuse my investigator of adopting a biased approach as well as mismanaging my claim. As a result I believe that I received more compensation than their guidelines for a complaint which was only really relating to admin problems and delay in paying out cash.(Leonard Curtis executed my share transfers). Was that fair? I think not.

masonic

Regarding complaint handling, it's not a recent thing, and has been an issue for years. When people try to bring up complaint handling as a direct aspect of their complaint, there is a fairly consistent knee-jerk reaction at the FOS that it is outside of their jurisdiction. However, while the way in which a complaint was handled is not something they are willing to adjudicate, they are happy to examine outcomes and the impact the complaint journey has had on you, so as to award compensation for D&I.

It is just one of their 'buttons', like suggesting compensation should be linked to units of time / hourly rates, or that an award should be punitive on the firm. These issues can all be taken into account, but need to be introduced in an indirect manner.

So, to achieve compensation for poor complaint handling, it is best to state the impact the poor complaint handling had on you (number of communications that needed to be made, time spent on issue, delays, and distress caused by unsatisfactory responses) against the yardstick of what is reasonable in everyday life, rather than citing breaches of a policy and suggesting a sum should be awarded for each breach.

johnburman

Masonic - I agree.

but thinking about it for my complaint, ITI simply ignored my complaints, and also ignored the FOS until the decision was made by them, and then they paid up.   So there was no "handling" of my complaint at all

masonic

johnburman said:

Masonic - I agree.

but thinking about it for my complaint, ITI simply ignored my complaints, and also ignored the FOS until the decision was made by them, and then they paid up.   So there was no "handling" of my complaint at all

Yes, the rules were made based on an underlying assumption that firms would have a minimum level of cooperation and engagement. They were not designed for a company like ITI. The FCA should learn lessons from this episode and make appropriate reforms, but I doubt that they will.

SamAus

I just took my case to the FOS, who replied eight days later offering ITI a further eight weeks (I originally lodged my complaint in September 2022 with ITI) to issue me with a final letter. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is absolutely not how the FOS should operate. Now I am well over the eight week period, the FOS should step in to adjudicate?

It makes me so sad and angry that this type of behaviour is allowed to continue in the UK. ITI can completely get away with this without any consequence. 

masonic

SamAus said:

I just took my case to the FOS, who replied eight days later offering ITI a further eight weeks (I originally lodged my complaint in September 2022 with ITI) to issue me with a final letter. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is absolutely not how the FOS should operate. Now I am well over the eight week period, the FOS should step in to adjudicate?

It makes me so sad and angry that this type of behaviour is allowed to continue in the UK. ITI can completely get away with this without any consequence. 

Correct. Their focus should now be on gathering evidence and then providing you with an initial assessment within 90 days. ITI can make an offer of compensation at any time, but this really should now be via the case handler, not direct to you.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/who-we-are/service-standards/service-complaints

RasputinB

SamAus said:

I just took my case to the FOS, who replied eight days later offering ITI a further eight weeks (I originally lodged my complaint in September 2022 with ITI) to issue me with a final letter. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is absolutely not how the FOS should operate. Now I am well over the eight week period, the FOS should step in to adjudicate?

It makes me so sad and angry that this type of behaviour is allowed to continue in the UK. ITI can completely get away with this without any consequence. 

Probably also worth phoning the customer helpline on 0800 023 4567. (Usually a free call from abroad using Internet call services.) If you make your points over the phone they should add them to the case file. Your case handler probably won't want colleagues adding these to the file and may become motivated to sorting your problem even before the complaint process kicks in.