Dealing with Financial Ombudsman

masonic

Ortives said:

masonic said:

Ortives said:

masonic said:

Ortives said:

dunstonh said:

Thrugelmir said:

Ortives said:

Tildaplum said:

Can I go back to your original first post - what is it you want from this forum - what are you asking us to do?

Somebody on the last page said that there should be an appeals process, but for some reason FO are not giving me access to it and want me to start the dispute over from the beginning instead.

Perhaps you are now known as a serial complainer............. Other people have more serious matters that need addressing as a matter of priority. 

Which could be one of the reasons they chose to end services.    That, fraud and a serious lack of trust being the most common reasons.

Which of the following do you consider more likely for the reason my ISA was closed?

1. It was on the verge of maturing and the terms meant that no interest was due in the event of an early closure. The bank would owe no interest if they closed it themselves and I would simply get the initial deposit back.

2. The bank considered me to be a serial complainer due to never having raised any complaints with them.

Most likely it was (3) The bank believed continuing to offer you banking products and services was a risk to their business.

Given that you're our only source of information about your personal circumstances, and you've not proven to be the most reliable witness so far, I doubt anything posted in this thread will be of use to anyone.

Perhaps I should go around making false accusations about everybody on the site and having digs at people in order to fit in better?

So far all of your false accusations have been quite focused. I don't think spreading them around everybody in the site will help matters, but if you must continue to make false accusations it would probably be fairer to include everyone.

Now, tell me more about the £20,000 the bank stole from you...

I have to ask. Why have you wasted 10 years of your life trolling people on this website? Do you ever sit back and think about all of the better things you could have done with your life?

This may come as a surprise to you, but I haven't spent 10 years of my life on this website. I visit this website for relatively brief periods of time, and have done so, off and on, over the past 10 years. I'm not here to troll, I'm here to help people, and I always provide useful assistance when I can. However, some people aren't interested.

...wait, that was an example of you going around making false accusations about everybody on the site as per your previous post. You nearly had me there

eskbanker

Ortives said:
Unfortunately I wasn't specific enough that I was complaining about the ISA, even though that should have been extremely obvious as the only balance was in the ISA and the cheque was for the money in the ISA.

The ombudsman then made a ruling assuming I was complaining about not being sent a cheque for the £0 that was in the savings account.

I pointed out to FO that I was complaining about the ISA and not the savings account, but they didn't care and wanted my complaint to be about not being sent a cheque for a £0 balance in a savings account. Obviously I couldn't care less about the £0 and nobody would raise such a complaint in the first place...

I've just had a quick read through of the thread again and it's still not clear to me whether you went through all stages of the FOS process, i.e. escalating beyond the original adjudication and referring to an actual ombudsman for a final decision?

If it's just the adjudicator who got the wrong end of the stick about which account is the subject of the complaint and refuses to reconsider then obviously that's what you'd base your escalation to the ombudsman on - are you saying that both the adjudicator and ombudsman misunderstood what you were trying to say?  If so, then this would indeed suggest that you probably need to go back to square one and compose a complaint more carefully (you'd previously referred to a non-existent savings account switching service for example ("they assumed I was complaining about money in a savings account (£0 as I used an account switching service for that...)"), which obviously diminishes credibility).

On the other hand, if it's only been reviewed by an adjudicator thus far then you can escalate to an ombudsman, as per stage 5 of https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/how-to-complain

If you want to take things further

If you or the business disagree with what we think, you (or the business) can ask for a formal decision from one of our ombudsmen.

Our ombudsmen will look at things afresh, and have the power to make legally binding final decisions. If you reject the ombudsman's final decision, we can’t take your complaint further – but you can still go to court instead.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/faqs/all/can-appeal-ombudsmans-decision reiterates that if the final ombudsman decision has been taken then that's the end of the road as far as FOS is concerned....

Ortives

eskbanker said:

Ortives said:
Unfortunately I wasn't specific enough that I was complaining about the ISA, even though that should have been extremely obvious as the only balance was in the ISA and the cheque was for the money in the ISA.

The ombudsman then made a ruling assuming I was complaining about not being sent a cheque for the £0 that was in the savings account.

I pointed out to FO that I was complaining about the ISA and not the savings account, but they didn't care and wanted my complaint to be about not being sent a cheque for a £0 balance in a savings account. Obviously I couldn't care less about the £0 and nobody would raise such a complaint in the first place...

I've just had a quick read through of the thread again and it's still not clear to me whether you went through all stages of the FOS process, i.e. escalating beyond the original adjudication and referring to an actual ombudsman for a final decision?

If it's just the adjudicator who got the wrong end of the stick about which account is the subject of the complaint and refuses to reconsider then obviously that's what you'd base your escalation to the ombudsman on - are you saying that both the adjudicator and ombudsman misunderstood what you were trying to say?  If so, then this would indeed suggest that you probably need to go back to square one and compose a complaint more carefully (you'd previously referred to a non-existent savings account switching service for example ("they assumed I was complaining about money in a savings account (£0 as I used an account switching service for that...)"), which obviously diminishes credibility).

On the other hand, if it's only been reviewed by an adjudicator thus far then you can escalate to an ombudsman, as per stage 5 of https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/how-to-complain

If you want to take things further

If you or the business disagree with what we think, you (or the business) can ask for a formal decision from one of our ombudsmen.

Our ombudsmen will look at things afresh, and have the power to make legally binding final decisions. If you reject the ombudsman's final decision, we can’t take your complaint further – but you can still go to court instead.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/faqs/all/can-appeal-ombudsmans-decision reiterates that if the final ombudsman decision has been taken then that's the end of the road as far as FOS is concerned....

I completed the entire process with FO. I escalated to an ombudsman and was given a final ruling.

To be clear on something else, the account I have called a 'savings account' is not an actual 'savings account'. I can't recall what the bank called it, but it had a higher interest rate than their standard bank account. I could withdraw money whenever I liked. It was called something similar to 'savings account', but that was just the name the bank gave it rather than it's actual definition.

The adjudicator understood that my complaint was about funds in the ISA, but the ombudsman (whose decision is the final one that matters) believed I was complaining about funds in a bank account.

My complaint was constructed as follows:

Paragraph 1 - I explained that the bank closed my accounts and that I could not withdraw from the ISA before it was closed as the bank still expected me to pay a withdrawal fee if I withdrew the funds prior to them closing it. I then detailed about how I had tried to use an account switching service for the ISA, but was not able to do so and the bank confirmed that it would not be possible and instructed me to either pay a fee to get the funds out before closure, or wait for the ISA to be closed.

Paragraph 2 - Explained that the bank had informed me that any remaining funds would be paid to me via cheque UNLESS I provided them with an alternative. I pointed out that FO's ruling on their decision on me not being owed any interest on the 20K they had held for 4 years and 10 months echoed this.

Paragraph 3 - Explained that I provided the bank with an alternative method but they ignored it. Stated that the bank sent a cheque for the remaining balance instead and that the reason they gave me for defying my instructions was simply 'We wanted to send a cheque instead.'. Explained that I had not received the cheque, but the bank claimed to have sent it and had refused to issue another.

Unfortunately I didn't specify that the funds were in the ISA as I felt that I had made that clear in the first paragraph. The ombudsman didn't seem to get this and simply assumed that the funds were in a regular bank account. Apparently I should have specified this in the third paragraph by stating that the cheque was for the funds in the ISA.

The adjudicator practically admitted that the ombudsman made a mistake and told me that I had to submit the complaint again, making it clear that I was complaining about money in an ISA, which account switching service was not available for, instead of money in a bank account.

The ombudsman completely stripped the entire first paragraph from their ruling and didn't mention anything about the ISA at all. The ruling reads as follows:

I complained about being sent a cheque for the remaining balance in my bank account after my bank account was closed. (wrong)

The bank had previously informed me that if I wanted to be paid by a method other than cheque, I had to provide the bank with an alternative method. I decided not to do this. (wrong)

Even if I had, I could have either withdrawn the money or used an account switching service before it was closed. The situation is therefore entirely my own fault and the ombudsman agreed that the bank don't have to issue me with another cheque. (wrong as the complaint was not about the bank account and an account switching service was not available for the ISA)

eskbanker

What you've posted is certainly consistent with a view that FOS don't know what they're doing - it would undoubtedly be possible to continue to debate the case on here but as you've exhausted the FOS process, including reference to the independent assessor, without satisfaction, then it seems to me that you only have four options left:

1. Take the bank to court
2. Open another case with FOS
3. Engage with one or more financial journalists from the Press
4. Let it drop and move on.

If you're still £20K down then option 4 understandably won't be acceptable to you, so take your pick from the others....

A final observation - I'm conscious that you wish to be cautious in what you choose to share on here but if this is your idea of being clear then it must be said that it's entirely possible that at least some of the misunderstanding and miscommunication has been of your own doing, so perhaps worth getting someone else to proof-read what you send next:

Ortives said:
To be clear on something else, the account I have called a 'savings account' is not an actual 'savings account'. I can't recall what the bank called it, but it had a higher interest rate than their standard bank account. I could withdraw money whenever I liked. It was called something similar to 'savings account', but that was just the name the bank gave it rather than it's actual definition.

masonic

It is still unclear what you are trying to achieve, but that will inform the best course of action. If, for example, you are just trying to get your money back and wish to challenge the non-application of interest to the account, then you might find the best route to do this is Money Claim Online. In theory you could request interest at the eye-watering rate of 8% from the point the money should have been returned to you. This could make up for the loss of interest during the 5 year term of the account if this was withheld in line with the terms and conditions.

However, if you are trying to preserve the ISA status of the money, then I don't think anything other than a fresh complaint would result in the bank being made to reinstate the account for the purposes of you making an ISA transfer request through a new ISA provider. It's still unclear to me how no interest at all was paid. Interest is generally paid annually, and access comes with an interest penalty, but said penalty rarely makes much of a dent when the account is held for in excess of 4 years.

colsten

masonic said:

It's still unclear to me how no interest at all was paid. Interest is generally paid annually, and access comes with an interest penalty, but said penalty rarely makes much of a dent when the account is held for in excess of 4 years.

This would be the first cash ISA that pays no interest at all for each of several financial years.

Mind you, the OP may have held an S&S ISA which wouldn't have paid interest, and which could be worth less than the initial investment.

masonic

colsten said:

masonic said:

It's still unclear to me how no interest at all was paid. Interest is generally paid annually, and access comes with an interest penalty, but said penalty rarely makes much of a dent when the account is held for in excess of 4 years.

This would be the first cash ISA that pays no interest at all for each of several financial years.

Mind you, the OP may have held an S&S ISA which wouldn't have paid interest, and which could be worth less than the initial investment.

I suppose it could have been a Guaranteed Equity Bond wrapped in an ISA. In which case the returns are linked to investment performance at the end of the 5 year term and there wouldn't necessarily be anything paid during the term. It would certainly seem to fit the OP's circumlocutious description above of a savings account that wasn't really a savings account, and in this case early access could have been without penalty, but to achieve a return, the investment product must be held to term.

If so, there would be no point pursuing lost interest - when taking out an investment product like this there is always the risk that the bank will have reason to end its relationship with you and you could lose out, although the bank would only do so on the basis of a risk assessment or based on the customer's conduct, and of course would not provide a justification to the customer. Perhaps it would have been fair and reasonable in those circumstances to offer some interest in lieu of the final return at maturity of the structured product, and that could be one point to pursue in a better drafted FOS complaint, but there would be no contractual right to such a payment, so pusuing that through the court system would be ineffective.

If it was a structured product, then that does present another potential option for resolution that should at least be considered.

dunstonh

If the OP was to give the DRN then we could look at the FOS decision and tell a lot more from it.  However, as it stands, we just have the one sided comments to go on and there are a number of inconsistencies.