Shock at Fin Ombudsman Decision

nossa_2

Manxman don't you think they would have said and proved that they had honoured the redress to the ombudsman. I know I'm shocked at the ombudsman but they did actually discover no redress was made. You are funny 😂😂

Manxman_in_exile

Then stop messing about and being shocked and send off a Letter Before Claim.

The sooner that's done the sooner you'll get your money

nossa_2

This is hardly about the money but please don't feel you have to read anything more on this thread

eskbanker

nossa_2 said:

Nothing received and no I'm not trying to prove a point I am just shocked at their behaviour and more shocked that the FOS can do nothing. So really I shouldn't be shocked at their behaviour they are obviously aware of this gaping hole in the rights of their customers 

The inability to escalate to FOS isn't actually the 'gaping hole in customers' rights' that you seem to think, as FOS can't actually force institutions to act on its findings (even the legally-binding final decisions), as evidenced in a massive old thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5899463/when-banks-dont-act-on-fos-findings/p1

As pointed out above by @Undervalued, even a court can't literally force payment either, so theoretically a recalcitrant institution could dig their heels in and make things extremely difficult for claimants - however, it's hugely unlikely that an institution, especially a household name, would do this deliberately, which is why I remain convinced that this is an admin error of some sort, and one that'll be rectified once they recognise that you're serious about legal action.

nossa_2

Eskbanker yes they will I'm sure sort this before court (not sure about the DSAR request though) but at every turn they have behaved unacceptly. I did start this thread because of my shock at FOS decision and I am in the process of trying to close out this loop hole with Parliament but this could take some time 😂😂😂

nossa_2

eskbanker said

The inability to escalate to FOS isn't actually the 'gaping hole in customers' rights' that you seem to think, as FOS can't actually force institutions to act on its findings (even the legally-binding final decisions), as evidenced in a massive old thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5899463/when-banks-dont-act-on-fos-findings/p1

I've just gone through this discussion and it has made me more determined to get Parliament to tighten up on the FOS powers - this bank should have been reported to the FCA and the complaint handling addressed by FOS managers. This was before lock down gave every institution the excuse to delay and things have just got worse. The FOS is not free it is tax payer funded and is looking like a waste of money

eskbanker

nossa_2 said:
The FOS is not free it is tax payer funded and is looking like a waste of money

It's not taxpayer-funded, it's funded by the financial institutions:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/who-we-are/governance-funding

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/316572/Financial-Ombudsman-Service-Annual-Report-and-Accounts-2020-21.pdf

The Financial Ombudsman is funded by a combination of levies, individual case fees and income from our group‑account fee arrangements paid by the financial businesses we cover.

robatwork

Sadly I think there's Norway you will get this money

nossa_2

  Thank you for lightening my mood - the funding policy maybe goes in some way to explain the bias. Does not detract from a service that is far from satisfactory

eskbanker

nossa_2 said:

...the funding policy maybe goes in some way to explain the bias. Does not detract from a service that is far from satisfactory

What bias?

And I'm certainly not defending FOS, which undoubtedly has many flaws, but personally I don't see your unhappiness with the way its role is legally defined to be any sort of reflection on its performance as such....