Banks refusing/ignoring/sidestepping clear requests to register complaints via chat

eskbanker

Ulrich said:

The thing is mere mortals cannot complain to FCA, they should use FOS.

Naturally the FCA directs consumers to FOS for most matters but anyone with valid concerns about the practices of a financial institution, which fall outside the FOS remit, can approach the FCA directly:

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/your-rights-financial-services

When all is said and done, FOS is simply an independent ombudsman service that arbitrates disputes between consumers and institutions, and has no direct role in enforcing regulatory compliance as such, even though they may indeed relay trend data to the FCA.

Ulrich

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

The thing is mere mortals cannot complain to FCA, they should use FOS.

Naturally the FCA directs consumers to FOS for most matters but anyone with valid concerns about the practices of a financial institution, which fall outside the FOS remit, can approach the FCA directly:

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/your-rights-financial-services

When all is said and done, FOS is simply an independent ombudsman service that arbitrates disputes between consumers and institutions, and has no direct role in enforcing regulatory compliance as such, even though they may indeed relay trend data to the FCA.

From what I can see there the only matter one can approach FCA directly is Misleading financial adverts and Unfair or unclear contract terms, otherwise it's FCA, EA, ActionFraud or a court.

I understand FOS has its jurisdiction and don't insist it should solve all problems in the world.
In fact, I just wanted to get a better picture of how the whole picture looks like.
So far it's like FCA sets the rules regarding complaints handling but for customers there is no way to report their violations.

eskbanker

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

The thing is mere mortals cannot complain to FCA, they should use FOS.

Naturally the FCA directs consumers to FOS for most matters but anyone with valid concerns about the practices of a financial institution, which fall outside the FOS remit, can approach the FCA directly:

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/your-rights-financial-services

When all is said and done, FOS is simply an independent ombudsman service that arbitrates disputes between consumers and institutions, and has no direct role in enforcing regulatory compliance as such, even though they may indeed relay trend data to the FCA.

From what I can see there the only matter one can approach FCA directly is Misleading financial adverts and Unfair or unclear contract terms, otherwise it's FCA, EA, ActionFraud or a court.

I understand FOS has its jurisdiction and don't insist it should solve all problems in the world.
In fact, I just wanted to get a better picture of how the whole picture looks like.
So far it's like FCA sets the rules regarding complaints handling but for customers there is no way to report their violations.

I don't believe that's intended to be an exhaustive list of every scenario that can be referred to the FCA, but if you have a valid concern about a financial institution that is outside FOS jurisdiction and clearly nothing to do with Action Fraud, courts, etc, then raising it with the regulator seems an obvious next step, despite their understandable attempts to direct people towards their standard consumer complaints process.  I haven't gone back through the whole thread but have you actually tried this yet?

masonic

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

WillPS said:
My technique so far has been to open a complaint about the deliberate ignorance of the instruction to open a complaint, but sometimes they then open another 'feedback which you won't hear back about'(!!). I've got one complaint which I've insisted goes before an ombudsman where I had to ask 7 times for a complaint to be opened.

I will update the thread when I hear back from the ombudsman, but the investigator didn't really seem to pick up the ball with this aspect of my complaint (despite me repeatedly pointing back to it) so I'm not too optimistic.

It'll be interesting to see if FOS reject your case as invalid, as there have been previous threads about them doing so on the basis that complaint handling isn't a regulated activity and is therefore outside their remit.

Could you share a link?
If it's true, all banks are free to close all their complaint channels, get rid of their complaints departments (and part of customer service department as well) and stop reporting number of complaints to FCA as there is none?

I've seen a couple of threads here where this was the case, although I probably wouldn't be able to find them again now.

Complaint handling processes are a matter for the FCA and the FOS cannot award punitive damages for non-compliance. They can only award compensation for the overall impact the matter has on the consumer. If the substance of the complaint is that there was a technical breach, then there may be nothing in the complaint the FOS can consider. FOS can flag concerns to the FCA, but this won't influence the outcome of an individual complaint.

Hmm.. still can't wrap my head around - if one complains about the bank limiting their options to complain and the bank refuses to do anything about that, one can still escalate to the FOS but they cannot do anything about it, is that what you're saying? Sounds like Catch 22 then.

The FOS is not a regulator so it cannot make the bank set up new complaints channels. If the failure to let you complain through a particular medium hasn't in itself caused you financial loss or distress and inconvenience beyond the frustrations we can all reasonably expect in day to day life, then there wouldn't be any substance to the complaint that they could address.

You would be entitled to ask for the cost of a first class stamp, a couple of sheets of paper and an envelope to be added on to your compensation for whatever it is you are complaining about, but the necessity of incurring these costs to put your complaint to Barclays isn't itself a complaint the FOS can hear.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (I think), whether or not Barclays accepts you have complained by expressing a dissatisfaction through an electronic medium, you have made a complaint and could escalate it if it isn't addressed within 8 weeks.

Sounds like anything that didn't cause me financial loss or serious distress can be ignored by the bank in a hope I won't escalate after 8 weeks.

Not really. Even if you just get an apology or your complaint isn't upheld, then it will cost the bank a case fee. That is unless your complaint is considered vexatious, which it might be if dissatisfaction with their complaints procedure is all you have (i.e. no cause to actually use it).

If nothing more than dissatisfaction with the complaints procedure, then that's not really any better than complaining because you don't like their interest rates, branding or opening hours. Easily solved by exercising your freedom of choice.

Ulrich

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

The thing is mere mortals cannot complain to FCA, they should use FOS.

Naturally the FCA directs consumers to FOS for most matters but anyone with valid concerns about the practices of a financial institution, which fall outside the FOS remit, can approach the FCA directly:

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/your-rights-financial-services

When all is said and done, FOS is simply an independent ombudsman service that arbitrates disputes between consumers and institutions, and has no direct role in enforcing regulatory compliance as such, even though they may indeed relay trend data to the FCA.

From what I can see there the only matter one can approach FCA directly is Misleading financial adverts and Unfair or unclear contract terms, otherwise it's FCA, EA, ActionFraud or a court.

I understand FOS has its jurisdiction and don't insist it should solve all problems in the world.
In fact, I just wanted to get a better picture of how the whole picture looks like.
So far it's like FCA sets the rules regarding complaints handling but for customers there is no way to report their violations.

I don't believe that's intended to be an exhaustive list of every scenario that can be referred to the FCA, but if you have a valid concern about a financial institution that is outside FOS jurisdiction and clearly nothing to do with Action Fraud, courts, etc, then raising it with the regulator seems an obvious next step, despite their understandable attempts to direct people towards their standard consumer complaints process.  I haven't gone back through the whole thread but have you actually tried this yet?

It's not my thread (here's my one) and I've never tried contacting FCA.

eskbanker

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

The thing is mere mortals cannot complain to FCA, they should use FOS.

Naturally the FCA directs consumers to FOS for most matters but anyone with valid concerns about the practices of a financial institution, which fall outside the FOS remit, can approach the FCA directly:

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/your-rights-financial-services

When all is said and done, FOS is simply an independent ombudsman service that arbitrates disputes between consumers and institutions, and has no direct role in enforcing regulatory compliance as such, even though they may indeed relay trend data to the FCA.

From what I can see there the only matter one can approach FCA directly is Misleading financial adverts and Unfair or unclear contract terms, otherwise it's FCA, EA, ActionFraud or a court.

I understand FOS has its jurisdiction and don't insist it should solve all problems in the world.
In fact, I just wanted to get a better picture of how the whole picture looks like.
So far it's like FCA sets the rules regarding complaints handling but for customers there is no way to report their violations.

I don't believe that's intended to be an exhaustive list of every scenario that can be referred to the FCA, but if you have a valid concern about a financial institution that is outside FOS jurisdiction and clearly nothing to do with Action Fraud, courts, etc, then raising it with the regulator seems an obvious next step, despite their understandable attempts to direct people towards their standard consumer complaints process.  I haven't gone back through the whole thread but have you actually tried this yet?

It's not my thread (here's my one) and I've never tried contacting FCA.

From a quick look at that one, it wouldn't seem likely IMHO that your grievance will fall within the FOS remit as it doesn't involve regulated activities - nothing stopping you from trying of course, but if they knock it back then the FCA would seem to be the obvious alternative.

Ulrich

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

WillPS said:
My technique so far has been to open a complaint about the deliberate ignorance of the instruction to open a complaint, but sometimes they then open another 'feedback which you won't hear back about'(!!). I've got one complaint which I've insisted goes before an ombudsman where I had to ask 7 times for a complaint to be opened.

I will update the thread when I hear back from the ombudsman, but the investigator didn't really seem to pick up the ball with this aspect of my complaint (despite me repeatedly pointing back to it) so I'm not too optimistic.

It'll be interesting to see if FOS reject your case as invalid, as there have been previous threads about them doing so on the basis that complaint handling isn't a regulated activity and is therefore outside their remit.

Could you share a link?
If it's true, all banks are free to close all their complaint channels, get rid of their complaints departments (and part of customer service department as well) and stop reporting number of complaints to FCA as there is none?

I've seen a couple of threads here where this was the case, although I probably wouldn't be able to find them again now.

Complaint handling processes are a matter for the FCA and the FOS cannot award punitive damages for non-compliance. They can only award compensation for the overall impact the matter has on the consumer. If the substance of the complaint is that there was a technical breach, then there may be nothing in the complaint the FOS can consider. FOS can flag concerns to the FCA, but this won't influence the outcome of an individual complaint.

Hmm.. still can't wrap my head around - if one complains about the bank limiting their options to complain and the bank refuses to do anything about that, one can still escalate to the FOS but they cannot do anything about it, is that what you're saying? Sounds like Catch 22 then.

The FOS is not a regulator so it cannot make the bank set up new complaints channels. If the failure to let you complain through a particular medium hasn't in itself caused you financial loss or distress and inconvenience beyond the frustrations we can all reasonably expect in day to day life, then there wouldn't be any substance to the complaint that they could address.

You would be entitled to ask for the cost of a first class stamp, a couple of sheets of paper and an envelope to be added on to your compensation for whatever it is you are complaining about, but the necessity of incurring these costs to put your complaint to Barclays isn't itself a complaint the FOS can hear.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (I think), whether or not Barclays accepts you have complained by expressing a dissatisfaction through an electronic medium, you have made a complaint and could escalate it if it isn't addressed within 8 weeks.

Sounds like anything that didn't cause me financial loss or serious distress can be ignored by the bank in a hope I won't escalate after 8 weeks.

Not really. Even if you just get an apology or your complaint isn't upheld, then it will cost the bank a case fee. That is unless your complaint is considered vexatious, which it might be if dissatisfaction with their complaints procedure is all you have (i.e. no cause to actually use it).

If nothing more than dissatisfaction with the complaints procedure, then that's not really any better than complaining because you don't like their interest rates, branding or opening hours. Easily solved by exercising your freedom of choice.

I get your point about a case fee - you think the banks won't usually bluntly ignore complaints willing to avoid that, right?

A real example: I wasn't happy that in 2025 HSBC still have no option to manage payees in their app and went to their chat to make a complaint. They offered me help but did not register a complaint.
I made a formal complaint via Resolver and their final response was "you were not online to receive a reference number so it's not our fault".

So technically there is no financial loss or huge inconvenience.
On the other hand, the channel they provide for complaints is not fit for purpose.
And because that channel is the only way to resolve issues with the bank, I'm not happy with the way it is because it seriously limits my options to make a complaint.
And if we remind ourselves that the complaint procedure was established not because the banks are soo helpful.. but if there is no real way to enforce that, it means nothing.
And almost every bank does that nowadays, no freedom of choice here I'm afraid.

Ulrich

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

Ulrich said:

The thing is mere mortals cannot complain to FCA, they should use FOS.

Naturally the FCA directs consumers to FOS for most matters but anyone with valid concerns about the practices of a financial institution, which fall outside the FOS remit, can approach the FCA directly:

https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/your-rights-financial-services

When all is said and done, FOS is simply an independent ombudsman service that arbitrates disputes between consumers and institutions, and has no direct role in enforcing regulatory compliance as such, even though they may indeed relay trend data to the FCA.

From what I can see there the only matter one can approach FCA directly is Misleading financial adverts and Unfair or unclear contract terms, otherwise it's FCA, EA, ActionFraud or a court.

I understand FOS has its jurisdiction and don't insist it should solve all problems in the world.
In fact, I just wanted to get a better picture of how the whole picture looks like.
So far it's like FCA sets the rules regarding complaints handling but for customers there is no way to report their violations.

I don't believe that's intended to be an exhaustive list of every scenario that can be referred to the FCA, but if you have a valid concern about a financial institution that is outside FOS jurisdiction and clearly nothing to do with Action Fraud, courts, etc, then raising it with the regulator seems an obvious next step, despite their understandable attempts to direct people towards their standard consumer complaints process.  I haven't gone back through the whole thread but have you actually tried this yet?

It's not my thread (here's my one) and I've never tried contacting FCA.

From a quick look at that one, it wouldn't seem likely IMHO that your grievance will fall within the FOS remit as it doesn't involve regulated activities - nothing stopping you from trying of course, but if they knock it back then the FCA would seem to be the obvious alternative.

possibly, I might give it a go

masonic

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

WillPS said:
My technique so far has been to open a complaint about the deliberate ignorance of the instruction to open a complaint, but sometimes they then open another 'feedback which you won't hear back about'(!!). I've got one complaint which I've insisted goes before an ombudsman where I had to ask 7 times for a complaint to be opened.

I will update the thread when I hear back from the ombudsman, but the investigator didn't really seem to pick up the ball with this aspect of my complaint (despite me repeatedly pointing back to it) so I'm not too optimistic.

It'll be interesting to see if FOS reject your case as invalid, as there have been previous threads about them doing so on the basis that complaint handling isn't a regulated activity and is therefore outside their remit.

Could you share a link?
If it's true, all banks are free to close all their complaint channels, get rid of their complaints departments (and part of customer service department as well) and stop reporting number of complaints to FCA as there is none?

I've seen a couple of threads here where this was the case, although I probably wouldn't be able to find them again now.

Complaint handling processes are a matter for the FCA and the FOS cannot award punitive damages for non-compliance. They can only award compensation for the overall impact the matter has on the consumer. If the substance of the complaint is that there was a technical breach, then there may be nothing in the complaint the FOS can consider. FOS can flag concerns to the FCA, but this won't influence the outcome of an individual complaint.

Hmm.. still can't wrap my head around - if one complains about the bank limiting their options to complain and the bank refuses to do anything about that, one can still escalate to the FOS but they cannot do anything about it, is that what you're saying? Sounds like Catch 22 then.

The FOS is not a regulator so it cannot make the bank set up new complaints channels. If the failure to let you complain through a particular medium hasn't in itself caused you financial loss or distress and inconvenience beyond the frustrations we can all reasonably expect in day to day life, then there wouldn't be any substance to the complaint that they could address.

You would be entitled to ask for the cost of a first class stamp, a couple of sheets of paper and an envelope to be added on to your compensation for whatever it is you are complaining about, but the necessity of incurring these costs to put your complaint to Barclays isn't itself a complaint the FOS can hear.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (I think), whether or not Barclays accepts you have complained by expressing a dissatisfaction through an electronic medium, you have made a complaint and could escalate it if it isn't addressed within 8 weeks.

Sounds like anything that didn't cause me financial loss or serious distress can be ignored by the bank in a hope I won't escalate after 8 weeks.

Not really. Even if you just get an apology or your complaint isn't upheld, then it will cost the bank a case fee. That is unless your complaint is considered vexatious, which it might be if dissatisfaction with their complaints procedure is all you have (i.e. no cause to actually use it).

If nothing more than dissatisfaction with the complaints procedure, then that's not really any better than complaining because you don't like their interest rates, branding or opening hours. Easily solved by exercising your freedom of choice.

I get your point about a case fee - you think the banks won't usually bluntly ignore complaints willing to avoid that, right?

A real example: I wasn't happy that in 2025 HSBC still have no option to manage payees in their app and went to their chat to make a complaint. They offered me help but did not register a complaint.
I made a formal complaint via Resolver and their final response was "you were not online to receive a reference number so it's not our fault".

So technically there is no financial loss or huge inconvenience.
On the other hand, the channel they provide for complaints is not fit for purpose.
And because that channel is the only way to resolve issues with the bank, I'm not happy with the way it is because it seriously limits my options to make a complaint.
And if we remind ourselves that the complaint procedure was established not because the banks are soo helpful.. but if there is no real way to enforce that, it means nothing.
And almost every bank does that nowadays, no freedom of choice here I'm afraid.

You need to put together a case about how you were inconvenienced in your day to day banking activities through the deficiencies in the service (e.g. what you needed to do and what the impact of not being able to do it was). Then it is a complaint about a regulatory service. The impact that it had on you can be used to arrive at a distress and inconvenience payment.

For example, "Dear HSBC, I cannot believe that in 2025 you still don't have the option to manage payees in your app. I wanted to delete a payee I wasn't using any more, and to my horror, I had to open a web browser, log in to internet banking and do it there. I estimate this took me 30 seconds longer than it would have done if I could have done it directly within the app."

Potentially, when the complaint handler has finished laughing, they might offer you a fiver. And that would be a generous offer I'd recommend you take. However, I would caution against making multiple formal complaints about issues of this level of severity, as it could result in them ending their relationship with you.

Ulrich

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

masonic said:

Ulrich said:

eskbanker said:

WillPS said:
My technique so far has been to open a complaint about the deliberate ignorance of the instruction to open a complaint, but sometimes they then open another 'feedback which you won't hear back about'(!!). I've got one complaint which I've insisted goes before an ombudsman where I had to ask 7 times for a complaint to be opened.

I will update the thread when I hear back from the ombudsman, but the investigator didn't really seem to pick up the ball with this aspect of my complaint (despite me repeatedly pointing back to it) so I'm not too optimistic.

It'll be interesting to see if FOS reject your case as invalid, as there have been previous threads about them doing so on the basis that complaint handling isn't a regulated activity and is therefore outside their remit.

Could you share a link?
If it's true, all banks are free to close all their complaint channels, get rid of their complaints departments (and part of customer service department as well) and stop reporting number of complaints to FCA as there is none?

I've seen a couple of threads here where this was the case, although I probably wouldn't be able to find them again now.

Complaint handling processes are a matter for the FCA and the FOS cannot award punitive damages for non-compliance. They can only award compensation for the overall impact the matter has on the consumer. If the substance of the complaint is that there was a technical breach, then there may be nothing in the complaint the FOS can consider. FOS can flag concerns to the FCA, but this won't influence the outcome of an individual complaint.

Hmm.. still can't wrap my head around - if one complains about the bank limiting their options to complain and the bank refuses to do anything about that, one can still escalate to the FOS but they cannot do anything about it, is that what you're saying? Sounds like Catch 22 then.

The FOS is not a regulator so it cannot make the bank set up new complaints channels. If the failure to let you complain through a particular medium hasn't in itself caused you financial loss or distress and inconvenience beyond the frustrations we can all reasonably expect in day to day life, then there wouldn't be any substance to the complaint that they could address.

You would be entitled to ask for the cost of a first class stamp, a couple of sheets of paper and an envelope to be added on to your compensation for whatever it is you are complaining about, but the necessity of incurring these costs to put your complaint to Barclays isn't itself a complaint the FOS can hear.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread (I think), whether or not Barclays accepts you have complained by expressing a dissatisfaction through an electronic medium, you have made a complaint and could escalate it if it isn't addressed within 8 weeks.

Sounds like anything that didn't cause me financial loss or serious distress can be ignored by the bank in a hope I won't escalate after 8 weeks.

Not really. Even if you just get an apology or your complaint isn't upheld, then it will cost the bank a case fee. That is unless your complaint is considered vexatious, which it might be if dissatisfaction with their complaints procedure is all you have (i.e. no cause to actually use it).

If nothing more than dissatisfaction with the complaints procedure, then that's not really any better than complaining because you don't like their interest rates, branding or opening hours. Easily solved by exercising your freedom of choice.

I get your point about a case fee - you think the banks won't usually bluntly ignore complaints willing to avoid that, right?

A real example: I wasn't happy that in 2025 HSBC still have no option to manage payees in their app and went to their chat to make a complaint. They offered me help but did not register a complaint.
I made a formal complaint via Resolver and their final response was "you were not online to receive a reference number so it's not our fault".

So technically there is no financial loss or huge inconvenience.
On the other hand, the channel they provide for complaints is not fit for purpose.
And because that channel is the only way to resolve issues with the bank, I'm not happy with the way it is because it seriously limits my options to make a complaint.
And if we remind ourselves that the complaint procedure was established not because the banks are soo helpful.. but if there is no real way to enforce that, it means nothing.
And almost every bank does that nowadays, no freedom of choice here I'm afraid.

You need to put together a case about how you were inconvenienced in your day to day banking activities through the deficiencies in the service (e.g. what you needed to do and what the impact of not being able to do it was). Then it is a complaint about a regulatory service. The impact that it had on you can be used to arrive at a distress and inconvenience payment.

For example, "Dear HSBC, I cannot believe that in 2025 you still don't have the option to manage payees in your app. I wanted to delete a payee I wasn't using any more, and to my horror, I had to open a web browser, log in to internet banking and do it there. I estimate this took me 30 seconds longer than it would have done if I could have done it directly within the app."

Potentially, when the complaint handler has finished laughing, they might offer you a fiver. And that would be a generous offer I'd recommend you take.

I appreciate your humour but you miss a couple of things here:
1. It is a shame HSBC pushes their customers to mobile app and yet it lacks basic functionality.
2. More importantly, I have a right to complaint and the bank denied to register my complaint using a rubbish excuse. That is serious. Next time they'll do the same even if the matter is much more important, just because they can.