Role of the Financial Ombudsman Service

Mixmyth

Hi,

I would like to bring to the attention of anyone thinking of raising a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.  Please be aware that not every financial institution is under the auspices of the service and their role is limited by the Financial Conduct Authority into what types of transactions are covered.  For example:  If you raise a complaint about a financial service with a financial company, they may give you a note that you may refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service, that company might not be under the jurisdiction of them anyway (which is in itself misleading) and, certain transactions ie: cash transactions may also not be covered. This may include save as you earn schemes and any 'third party' handlers of those schemes.

The Financial Ombudsman Service seems to be very limited in what they can/will do for you.  They will also not look into a matter if you are taking any other form of action against a financial company.

Please note that I am not any sort of financial expert, just a victim of alleged fraudulent activity by a former employer whose actions are not covered by the FO service.

Regards.  Mick Smith.

eskbanker

The role and remit of the FOS is defined in legislation (the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000), although its working practices are amplified in more detail by the FCA.

Your warning isn't very specific though, and vaguely hints at various issues that may or may not be related, perhaps it may all make a bit more sense if you share more of the story about exactly what happened, so that posters can advise of any alternative approaches if you've been knocked back by FOS?

diystarter7

Hi OP

I'm not 100% clear what you are saying
However, I'd just like to add the FOS helped me/us with a share trader that went belly up - it took a while and the claim was againt the company that was transferred the business of the company that went belly up. The complaint was against the new share delaing co - it took over a year - the FOS look at things in a detective-like way and take the evidence from all sides and their investigations and then come to a decison. The wait was long but they did help us.

OP, If I've completely misunderstood you, apols

Thanks

flaneurs_lobster

eskbanker said:

Your warning isn't very specific though, and vaguely hints at various issues that may or may not be related, perhaps it may all make a bit more sense if you share more of the story about exactly what happened, so that posters can advise of any alternative approaches if you've been knocked back by FOS?

Although the OP might want to retract his signature (if he's using his real name) if he does want to be more specific.

MSE rules do say that personal information should not be shared (including names).

Mixmyth

Thanks for the replies.  I applied my name so as not to dilute the essence of my post and I am quite happy to divulge it. If I am not allowed to add my name, consider it withdrawn.

My main point was that even though companies offer information about contacting the FOS, they may, knowingly, not be the type of company that fall under the auspices of the FOS and are just offering a false sense that they are regulated. Furthermore the type of transaction (or lack of one) may also not be eligible to be considered.  It is also my belief that companies use third party, unregulated financial companies to deal with their financial options (savings, pensions, shares, etc) to their employees to circumvent any problems, in the full knowledge that they are unregulated.

My own circumstance, in a nutshell:  I was working for a company and saving via a save as you earn scheme. I left the company and tried to withdraw my savings. The 'third party' concern used to deal with the transaction said they had paid me when they hadn't.  I followed this up and, eventually, got my money back.  I reported this to FOS who, eventually, said they could not act because the third party was not under their remit and, because it was a 'cash' transaction they could also not act.

My next line of intent is to report it to the police (Action Fraud) as I firmly believe that someone tried to pocket my savings whilst trying to convince me that I had been paid.  I have not done this thus far as FOS will not look at anything if police or other action is ongoing, (another odd peculiarity).

Thanks for listening.

eskbanker

Mixmyth said:

My own circumstance, in a nutshell:  I was working for a company and saving via a save as you earn scheme. I left the company and tried to withdraw my savings. The 'third party' concern used to deal with the transaction said they had paid me when they hadn't.  I followed this up and, eventually, got my money back.  I reported this to FOS who, eventually, said they could not act because the third party was not under their remit and, because it was a 'cash' transaction they could also not act.

Did the third party running the SAYE scheme claim to be regulated by the FCA, and if so, was there any representation that the specific activities relating to the SAYE scheme were regulated?  Did they direct you to the FOS?

DullGreyGuy

The FOS can certainly look at some SAYE schemes, there are several decisions in their online database (eg https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN7377394.pdf or https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN6893496.pdf ) That isnt to say that all administrators have to be FCA regulated or that all schemes fall under the jurisdiction of the FOS; it is certainly finite and can be nuanced 

phillw

Mixmyth said:

I followed this up and, eventually, got my money back.

My next line of intent is to report it to the police (Action Fraud) as I firmly believe that someone tried to pocket my savings whilst trying to convince me that I had been paid.

It would be difficult to prove that it was fraud, if they refunded it to you after you followed it up.

Band7

Mixmyth said:

 The 'third party' concern used to deal with the transaction said they had paid me when they hadn't.  I followed this up and, eventually, got my money back.  

As you have your money back, it is highly unlikely that ActionFraud or anyone else will pursue this matter.

If you want to warn people off, you could consider naming the company e.g. on this or other online media, or go to the Press. You would need to be able to back your accusations up with evidence, in order to avoid libel claims.

Zanderman

Mixmyth said:

Thanks for the replies.  I applied my name so as not to dilute the essence of my post and I am quite happy to divulge it. If I am not allowed to add my name, consider it withdrawn.

I can't see how omitting your name would reduce the information being given.  But if you want to withdraw it you do need to actually delete it by editing your opening post. Just saying 'consider it withdrawn' alters nothing if it's still there!

Re your point about pursuing your case with the police and ActionFraud I can't see, as others have also said, that they'd be interested at all as you have got your money back. So you'd probably be wasting your time.   

Mixmyth

Thanks for the comments.  It seems that, unlike, for example, all water companies are regulated by Ofwat, all communications companies are regulated by Ofcom, etc, etc, not all financial concerns are regulated by FCA.  Third party companies, (possibly created by big concerns) are created to manage things like SAYE, shares, etc, and are not regulated, and yes the company dealing with my finances did say they were regulated and also mentioned that I could refer them to FOS, when I couldn't.

With regard to aspects of possible fraud, the conversations I had with various people and the inept co-ordination and lack of policy and action felt like fraudulent attempts at avoiding giving me my savings, akin to phishing by criminals by phone.  There was definitely something suspicious.  Remember, even though I got my money, there only has to be an attempt to deprive me of it for it to be a criminal act.

Thanks again.