Student loans and pensions

Delete33

Agree Fusionx212, :T

Mrs_Ryan

Found an email in an old email account from opos on behalf of MiniCredit. They were trying to talk me out of complaining saying ‘oh they were good when you told them you were in difficulty so you won’t get anywhere with that’ I almost laughed at them! But I held firm and email has been sent. I’ve also sent one to SpeedyCash- that was one I couldn’t find an address for but it’s been sent now.
MyJar complaint hasn’t been assigned to an adjudicator yet. WDA has- I spoke to FOS yesterday and I’m hoping she can give them a nudge as they wanted another four weeks.
PDUK and Express I suspect will also go to the FOS- their time is up next week.
Sunny’s time up is tomorrow, I know they usually leave it until the 11th hour- living on the edge of my nerves with this one as this is the biggest and clearest cut case of unfair treatment. I’ve chased them a couple of times but no reply as yet.
Money Shop took forever to send statements and I’ve complained as well about them refusing to provide a complete set. They have 6 weeks left.
Then of course the journey is just starting with MiniCredit and Speedy Cash.
Looking at bank statements yesterday I was shocked- I routinely found credits from as many as three separate companies on one day!
UPDATE.
Sunny upheld my complaint but aren't giving me anything back! I'm taking this one to the Ombudsman as they ignored the fact they cleaned my bank account out at 7pm on Xmas Eve when I had arranged a payment plan with them. I'm absolutely furious!!

Ginger.ice

The FOS adjudicator who was working on 3 of my complaints has rejected all 3. These were against PDE, PDUK and 247 Moneybox.


Her argument is crazy to me. She says that based on my credit file (which is just about as bad as you can get) and the income / expenditure assessment that everyone exaggerates, the companies should have been allowed to take a commercial risk. Surely an acceptable commercial risk (risk of the lender not being repaid) cannot possibly be the same as responsible lending (ensuring the loans are right for both parties).


There is very little difference between these complaints and the others which have been upheld, so this highlights a very clear consistency issue within the FOS.


I am therefore escalating these for a final Ombudsmen decision. Fingers crossed they overturn the decision.


Still waiting to see if QQ and PTP fight back against the complaint which was upheld. The adjudicator gave them till April 27th to decide.

fusionx212

Ginger.ice wrote: »

The FOS adjudicator who was working on 3 of my complaints has rejected all 3. These were against PDE, PDUK and 247 Moneybox.


Her argument is crazy to me. She says that based on my credit file (which is just about as bad as you can get) and the income / expenditure assessment that everyone exaggerates, the companies should have been allowed to take a commercial risk. Surely an acceptable commercial risk (risk of the lender not being repaid) cannot possibly be the same as responsible lending (ensuring the loans are right for both parties).


There is very little difference between these complaints and the others which have been upheld, so this highlights a very clear consistency issue within the FOS.


I am therefore escalating these for a final Ombudsmen decision. Fingers crossed they overturn the decision.


Still waiting to see if QQ and PTP fight back against the complaint which was upheld. The adjudicator gave them till April 27th to decide.

end of the day it's an adjudicator not the fos themselves. So ones opinion can be overturned, there doesn't seem to be much recourse if they disagree with your assessment. The FOS is financed by financial industry so they are not entirely impartial, which makes me question them along the lines of don't bite the hands that feed you.

Excuse my wall of text.


information for researchers

funding

how is the Financial Ombudsman Service funded?

We are funded by levies and case fees which businesses we cover have to pay by law. Consumers do not pay to bring a complaint to the ombudsman. And we receive no government funding.

the levy

All businesses covered by the ombudsman service pay a levy to contribute to our costs. The amount of levy that each individual business has to pay can range from around £100 a year for a small firm of financial advisers to over £300,000 for a high-street bank or major insurance company.

Where a business has had no formal complaints referred to the ombudsman service, the levy is still payable. This is because all businesses benefit from the increased consumer confidence that the ombudsman brings.

And the ombudsman service's funding covers much more than our work settling cases. We carry out a wide range of complaints-prevention work, aimed at helping to stop problems turning into full-blown disputes.

For example, we publish our regular newsletter ombudsman news, our online technical resource, and our series of factsheets for consumers and guides for businesses. And we carry out an extensive outreach programme aimed both at consumers and businesses.

the case fee

A business also has to pay an individual case fee, when we handle a complaint about it and the case becomes "chargeable" under our rules. However, all businesses covered by the ombudsman service are entitled to a number of "free" cases.

Case fee arrangements are reviewed each year and subject to change. Under the current arrangements, a business does not have to pay a case fee for the first 25 cases settled during the year. For the 26th case and each subsequent complaint, the business has to pay a case fee of £550.

From April 2012 to April 2014, we also charged a supplementary case fee of £350 for the 26th (and each subsequent) payment protection insurance (PPI) mis-selling case.

In April 2013, we introduced a group-charging account for the largest financial services groups. Around three quarters of our workload is now paid for on this more financially stable basis – by the businesses whose customers use us most.

In January each year we consult publicly on our plans and budget for the year ahead – including the amount to be raised through the levy and the level of our case fee.

For more details see our factsheet:

fusionx212

Mrs_Ryan wrote: »

Found an email in an old email account from opos on behalf of MiniCredit. They were trying to talk me out of complaining saying ‘oh they were good when you told them you were in difficulty so you won’t get anywhere with that’ I almost laughed at them! But I held firm and email has been sent. I’ve also sent one to SpeedyCash- that was one I couldn’t find an address for but it’s been sent now.
MyJar complaint hasn’t been assigned to an adjudicator yet. WDA has- I spoke to FOS yesterday and I’m hoping she can give them a nudge as they wanted another four weeks.
PDUK and Express I suspect will also go to the FOS- their time is up next week.
Sunny’s time up is tomorrow, I know they usually leave it until the 11th hour- living on the edge of my nerves with this one as this is the biggest and clearest cut case of unfair treatment. I’ve chased them a couple of times but no reply as yet.
Money Shop took forever to send statements and I’ve complained as well about them refusing to provide a complete set. They have 6 weeks left.
Then of course the journey is just starting with MiniCredit and Speedy Cash.
Looking at bank statements yesterday I was shocked- I routinely found credits from as many as three separate companies on one day!
UPDATE.
Sunny upheld my complaint but aren't giving me anything back! I'm taking this one to the Ombudsman as they ignored the fact they cleaned my bank account out at 7pm on Xmas Eve when I had arranged a payment plan with them. I'm absolutely furious!!

surely if they upheld your complaint that's admission of fault. these companies are a joke the minute I see one say we're the good guys pah!! wolves in sheep's clothing..

Mrs_Ryan

Yep, they admitted fault. They're going to wipe all trace of the loans but because I paid them about £17 less than I loaned in total they consider no refund due!! They've offered me £50 immediately for the distress they caused with no prejudice to the Ombudsman complaint. I've asked for time to consider this.

fusionx212

Mrs_Ryan wrote: »

Yep, they admitted fault. They're going to wipe all trace of the loans but because I paid them about £17 less than I loaned in total they consider no refund due!! They've offered me £50 immediately for the distress they caused with no prejudice to the Ombudsman complaint. I've asked for time to consider this.

a swift no thanks will suffice. I wouldn't be surprised if the ombudsman says this is a fair offer. I have had the same done with barclays I rejected £400 compensation picked up £700 instead. stand your ground. state to sunny that the offer is not sufficient enough for you not to approach to ombudsman.

MARKOS72

Well thats my complaint sent off to the ombudsman,hope I managed to get my point across to them with regards to my complaint.
How are they in responding by email? The nature of my work means I cant always answer my phone as I work on or about the railway.

Delete33

Put my FOS complaint in on Saturday, no confirmation yet?

fusionx212

Delete33 wrote: »

Put my FOS complaint in on Saturday, no confirmation yet?

did you email them or use the form, I scanned my form and signed and emailed to them. then followed up with an email chasing confirmation it has been received the next day