Comments on: Financial Ombudsman losing it?

By: I A Sutton

I A Sutton — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 09:59:34 +0000

I believe the Financial Ombudsman Service lost it a long time ago. Were you aware that this ‘Service’ is not a Public Authority and therefore is not subject to the Powers, Fairness and Transparency of the ‘Freedom of Information Act?’ The FOS investigated a case that was based on my Company; ME the Director and Complainant. I applied for a Commercial ‘Business’ Loan and the bank agreed to lend, following credit-checking of director and Company. The bank stated it will take 5-weeks to complete. Instead, their procedure took 5-months. Of course, this proved financially detrimental to my Company start-up and as a result it could not trade. As a Complainant, I took my case to the FOS who investigated and sided with the bank. It was obvious that the FOS did not request or acquire information from the bank (Firm) as it would of confirmed that the bank did in fact agree to lend at the period we stated. Now, I cannot get ALL the information that the FOS used to conclude my case as the Freedom of Information Act does not apply to them. This is Outrageous! How can they not be ‘Subject’ to this level of transparency and Fairness? The FOS should scrapped and, instead, public money should be used to provide the tax payer with a Fair, Honest and Tranparent system. As a result of the banks failings, I have lost my business. Again, it seems like the ’systems’ that govern us are failing us.

By: Mickey

Mickey — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:59:38 +0000

FOS have certainly lost their mind but not in the favour of the financial industry as you claim. Quite the opposite. At the moment the secured loans brokers are in a state of shear panic as FOS has asked all accusations of PPI mis-selling to be paid out without contest - they refuse to back anyone. That means the broker - regardless of whether they were guilty of mis-selling has to pay back the entire policy amount and not just the commission they got off it. The lender doesn’t pay anything, nor does the insurance company. It’s only the broker that foots this bill.

What consumers and FOS fail to realise is that most brokers aren’t big banks. They haven’t the billion pounds of reserves to protect them. Some brokers are little more than family-run businesses. So across the country there’s a huge number of brokers having to lay off their staff as each claim can be as high as £12k and after just a few of those they’ll crumble.

FOS is doing this to protect its own image and it needs a scapegoat to flog. Brokers are a soft target.

Ultimately the consumer loses out as the level of choice diminishes and the only ones who survive are the big sharks who they wanted to attack in the first place.

So when you’re all attacking the industry wanting your pound of flesh: Try to realise there’s human beings behind it at all levels. Over 20 people got laid off at our broker - I was one of the lucky ones. We don’t mis-sell and if we were allowed to contest the cases we’d win but with FOS declaring open season on us we’re gonners.

By: R. Benson

R. Benson — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 13:16:30 +0000

Just one more word of advice.Avoid HSBC Insurance (Ireland) like the plague. They employ ‘bully boys’ Davies (loss adjusters) to help them avoid paying out.

By: R. Benson

R. Benson — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 13:00:02 +0000

What a complete waste of time the Ombudsman is, you do know that they have ‘Members’ don’t you? All the banks and the Insurance Co’s are ‘Members’ A damm good complaints dept, payed by the tax-payer. Your complaint unless its a few quid almost always gets rejected. NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE. They are there for appearances sake to make us think we are going to get a fair shake. NOTHING IS FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 06:04:01 +0000

Is regulatory capture as common in the UK as it is in the US? If this ombudsman became a regulator after a long career in the industry over which he now makes decisions, it might explain (but not excuse) a thing or two.

By: geoff chaplin

geoff chaplin — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:56:33 +0000

Not only banks, I believe the Ombudsman Service is equally prejudiced in favour of automatically defending the Insurance Companies, acceptiing their word without investigation, and even continuing the same view after proved wrong.

By: Steven J. Murdoch

Steven J. Murdoch — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 21:13:03 +0000

That was a very revealing interview from the FOS representative. I was especially surprised at the admission that they decide on a customers guilt based on procedures, evidence and criteria which are not disclosed to the public or complainant. I had hoped secret courts were going out of fashion given their abuse in the past — sadly it appears not.

The claim that the FOS’s “funding comes in effect from the financial services authority” is also intriguing. It appears to directly contradict their March 2007 statement:

who pays for the ombudsman service?
The Financial Ombudsman Service is paid for by levies and case fees which businesses covered by the ombudsman have to pay by law. At the time the ombudsman service was set up, parliament decided that consumers should not be charged for bringing a complaint to us.

By: William Watson

William Watson — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:34:56 +0000

Interestingly, all parties in the cases provided did not challenge the authenticity of the card used in the withdrawal.

Surely, it should be expected that the Banks (and FOS) have to prove that the original copy of the card must have been used (and hence with some knowledge of the cardholder). Alternatively, the complainants should have evidence that all elements of the card are clonable in addition to the issue of ‘yes-cards’ - another non-contested point.

But I’m sure all this is more easily said than done, especially in the regimes on display here.

By: cassiel

cassiel — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:43:04 +0000

Good article. I listened to the You and Yours item yesterday, and yes, it did indeed appear that the ombudsman gradually severed his connection with reality as the interview progressed. I just hope that we get some test cases going the right way before many more people become fraud victims due to such administrative arrogance.

By: A Job

A Job — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:24:24 +0000

I have difficulties in believing that, such organizations do actually exist in the so-called modern world, but when i know how powerful is the financial world and its links within the political spectrum, i understand while the common man like us got to be sacrifice. But thank heaven we got guys like you Ross and other who still believe in the name of integrity.