When the FOS tells lies

Gordon Kerrison made this Freedom of Information request to Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

The request was successful.

From: Gordon Kerrison

Dear Financial Ombudsman Service Limited,
Recently I was told by the FOS that the Chief Ombudsman had left
his position. The implication to me was that the FOS was without a
Chief. This being the case, I need to know to whom I report serious
irregularities by an Adjudicator and an Ombudsman. The Adjudicator
refused to examine my evidence against a bank, and accepted a
document from the bank that was never seen before by myself or my
solicitor. The bank refused to release it for examination for 17
months? It was examined by experts who deemed it as a joke. This
joke was used to deny me an FOS investigation, because it had a
date of years in the past putting me out of time, as was claimed by
the FOS and the bank. I discovered a false loan attached to my
account only 18 months before the adjudication and gave 100% proof
of the facts to the Adjudicator. The bank was unable to provide any
proof of a debt then, or now, and all this was in my evidence? I
have a letter in my possession wherein the FOS has made false and
malicious allegations about me to the Treasury. The FOS know all
about this and could not care what damage has been done to my
family and our lives. The bank were jubilant at the support they
received from the FOS and they harassed and threatened us until my
wife collapsed out of fear for our security.
The bank harassed us throughout the whole of their investgations
when they concluded no evidence, but that they would continue
actions against me on the basis that they THINK I had money from
them. All this was in my file in the adjudicators hands for
examination. We fled our home to escape the banks threats, and I
was told by a paramedic, that had I not been available to summon
medical help, my wife would have been comatose. We had to register
as Homeless in due course, the history of which is lengthy, but is
a direct result of this adjudicator and the bank.I fear reprisals
from no one, I have the evidence, and I have supporters.

MY question therefore is who in the FOS do I report these events
and false allegations. I believe on the evidence of these events,
criminal acts have been performed against my family, they have
stolen our lives, and our home.

Yours faithfully,

Gordon Kerrison

Link to this

Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Thank you for your email. We’ll be in touch shortly with a more detailed
reply.

In the meantime, if this is the first time you’ve contacted us, please
find below some details of our service – and how we can help you. This
may be useful for you to decide whether you want to complain formally.

how to make a formal complaint

We can't step in and investigate a complaint until the financial business
you're unhappy with has itself had the opportunity to put things right.
The steps to follow are set out on our website at:

[1]http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/co....

Unless you've already done so, this means you need to complain first to
the financial business involved. You can do this in two ways:

(1) You can contact the business yourself – asking them to deal with
your complaint under their official "complaints procedure". By law,
businesses have to complete this procedure within eight weeks – keeping
you up-to-date with the progress they make on your complaint.

(2) We can send details of your complaint to the business on your behalf
– if you send us a completed complaint form telling us the relevant
details. Our complaint form is on our website at the web address above. Or
you can phone us directly on 0845 080 1800 (office hours) to give us
details of your complaint – which we can forward to the business for
you.

more information

If you’d like us to send you more information (or our complaint form) in
the post, remember you’ll need to tell us your postal address. If
you’ve emailed us, we’ve probably only got your email address!

We’ll need your handwritten signature on the complaint form – and
copies of any paperwork relevant to your complaint (for example, copies of
bank statements, policy documents etc). You need to post these with your
complaint form to:

Financial Ombudsman Service
South Quay Plaza
183 Marsh Wall
London
E14 9SR
phone 0845 080 1800 (office hours)

video-welcome from our chief ombudsman

Watch our chief ombudsman talk about what to do if you’ve fallen out
with your bank, insurance company or finance firm:

[2]www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/about/video_welcome.htm

References

Visible links
1. http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/co...
2. http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/ab...

Link to this

From: Locke, Jonathan
Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Thank you for your e-mail.

I can confirm that the interim chief ombudsman is David Thomas who will
step down when the new permanent chief ombudsman has been appointed.

In relation to a complaint already considered, if you do not agree with
the adjudicator, you should contact them top confirm why and present any
further information you have (if you do have additional details). You
can ask that this matter is referred to an ombudsman so that he or she
can issue his or her decision to you. The ombudsman's decision if final
and can only be challenged in a Court of Law.

If you think that your complaint has not been handled properly in
respect of the way we have processed it, you can contact our Service
Review Team and confirm why you are unhappy. Whilst they cannot
overturn a decision made by an ombudsman, ultimately, they can look at
the process that was adopted in respect of your own complaint.

I hope this information will be of assistance to you.

Yours sincerely

Jonathan Locke
team manager

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Gordon Kerrison

Dear Locke, Jonathan,

Thank you for your response. I wish to add information and comment
on your response. You state I could have forwarded any new
information to the Adjudicator to assist my case! With respect, the
Adjudicator was supplied with all new information and ignored the
facts. Her conclusions were therefore falsehoods, the evidence
proves this. Following the adjudicators decision, I received a
letter from the Ombudsman, this letter,showed a complete ignorance
of my complaint, and proved to me he was in no way familiar with my
evidence. When I politely advised him of his errors, he wrote to
tell me not to write any more?
The Service Review Manager within the FOS was informed of these
facts, and his conclusion was that no procedural faults could be
found? My evidence was completely ignored, and replaced with
fiction and no procedural faults could be found? Furthermore, the
same manager, on being shown a letter from the bank, stating their
intention to CONTINUE their actions against me even during the FOS
investigations, commented to me in a letter, that the bank had the
right to do this! This is harassment as per the Harassment Act and
it was being condoned by the FOS. The bank threatened me throughout
this whole procedure?
The Information Commissioners Office gained many documents on my
behalf, that the bank refused to supply, amongst which, was the
document that the bank supplied to the FOS, this was accepted as
genuine, and on the strength of this document, I was refused an
investigation. How could the FOS accept a document that was never
presented to myself or solicitor via many requests for proof? The
Information Commissioners Office forced the bank ( after multi
requests were made) to release it 17 months later.( 17 months!
WHY?) Upon being expertly told that this document proved nothing of
the banks claims against me, I sent it to the bank for
clarification and identification. The bank declined to comment to
this request even though it was sent by registered mail direct?

This document then, was presented to the Independent Assessor for
his comments. I confirmed that the bank had refused to release this
document for 17 months, and that it was forced via Data Protection
intervention. I also informed him that the bank had delayed
progress even further by refusing to confirm its identity? I was
forced to consult expert bank advice on the credibility of this
document. I was told it could be easily created to order, and that
it contained no legal credibility whatever. This finding has been
agreed by other legal experts.INCLUDING A PROMINENT QC

The Independent Assessors response to this information?
" Sorry Cannot assist on this occasion- Too late! I have a 3 month
deadline".

You are stating that only a court of Law can take this further, I
need to know why such accusations of such serious nature, are not
within the sphere of influence of the CHIEF OMBUDSMAN? How are the
public supposed to understand or accept that the irregularities
outlined here, are not the concern of someone of integrity within
the offices of the FOS. None of those offices mentioned above above
have shown any regard for legal and honest investigations. They
seem delighted to quote their restrictions as though they have
performed their duty. I believe that any reasonable evidence
pointing to illegal activities, should not be subjected to time
limits. I believe that FOS officers in high management should know
the law if they are quoting it to the detriment of others and out
of ignorance. I quote the harassment by the bank condoned by the
Service Review Manager.Last but not least, I wish to inform you
that the facts I supplied the Adjudicator, those that she ignored
in favour of the bank, and in consequence allowed continued abuse
upon my family, have since then been proven true by Data Protection
intervention.

My questions are numerous, but essentially, I want to know why,
when you have a Chief Ombudsman - Service review team - Independent
assessor, you have no facility for investigating your very own
decisions when it is shown that you are clearly wrong.Or at the
very least receiving offers of proof so far ignored.

I want to know why members of the public are being told to go to
court against a bank, at great cost to themselves, possibly not
even affordable, because the offices above have failed either in
their duty, or due to restraints that this bank in particular has
found easily navigable to escape their illegal activities. It is
too easy for a bank to hold on to records being asked of them by
the Information Commissioners Office and know that after 3 months
the Independent Assessor will reject any request for help.

Yours sincerely,

Gordon Kerrison

Link to this

From: Locke, Jonathan
Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Thank you for your e-mail.

Based on what you have told me in this and your earlier enquiry, you
appear to have exhausted the general complaints process in terms of us
dealing with the complaint. In relation to our own internal complaints
process, this also appears to have been exhausted.

Whilst I would not wish to stop you from contacting the chief ombudsman,
the main reason for having the Independent Assessor is that he can view
complaints on an independent basis, looking from outside of the
organisation. If he has confirmed that he is unable to consider a
complaint or has provided his response to a complaint having
investigated it, there is nothing that could be added.

Your only other option would be I think to seek legal advice. As with
any business operating in the UK, all will most certainly have a
complaints process and once that has been exhausted, a consumer will
have some choices to make; either accept the decision, accept that the
matter will not be resolved through the internal/independent process or
that in respect of taking it further, they seek legal advice.

I think that in respect of your own concerns, that point may have been
reached. It is disappointing to know that you were unhappy with our
decision and that you were also unhappy with the outcome of your
complaint against the Financial Ombudsman Service. Your only option is,
to seek legal advice, if you wish to pursue the matter further.

I hope this additional and further information clarifies the position,
but I also appreciate that it is not the reply you were hoping to
receive.

Yours sincerely

Jonathan Locke
team manager

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Gordon Kerrison

Dear Locke, Jonathan,
Thank you for your reply. Your response confirms to me that the FOS
and the Chief Ombudsman, either, do not have the powers of internal
investigations, or, that the autonomy bestowed upon the FOS allows
them the last word regardless of the seriousness of a complaint.

The Adjudicator in this case was determined to find in favour of
the bank, she would not be moved, and sufficient of my reasoning to
her has been borne out by the Information Commissioners Office
since. This was no simple error of judgement, and the facts bear
witness to this. My evidence was brushed aside, in the face of
overwhelming evidence of irregularities by this bank, and
perpetuated by this adjudicator.

The FOS claim of fair play and unbiased adjudication has been
shattered in this case.
In addition, the ability for an untrained in law, adjudicator to
examine a document that has the power to prevent an investigation,
and allowing continued and deliberate damage by this bank of such
magnitude as to cause my family to be made legally homeless is an
intolerable abuse of power in my opinion, and I cannot believe the
evidence available would not support such a statement.

I inquired of the FOS if the adjudicators/ Ombudsmen were legally
trained, I was told "Some have legal knowledge"?

I was also advised that no legally trained person would have
accepted such a document of very dubious origin, and especially
not,in support of Lloyds bank claims.Sandra Greene the Adjudicator
ignored bank threats and verbal assault reports to readily accept
this document?

The British people come to you for justice by way of a fair
hearing,and any person who abuses that very responsible position of
trust, as my evidence clearly shows, then those people involved, if
found to have abused that trust become unfit for office, and should
be removed from office without hesitation.

Being forced from ones home due to bank thuggery, is not a memory
one forgets, the willful acts that cause destruction of lives and
financial security leaves the victims with an overpowering desire
for justice, and for justice to be seen to be done, I am driven to
this end.

Yours sincerely,

Gordon Kerrison

Link to this

From: Locke, Jonathan
Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Thank you for your e-mail.

I think that based on your e-mail below, I can add nothing further. It
seems clear that you have completed the internal complaints process and
that of the Independent Assessor. I am unable to comment on his
investigation.

Yours sincerely

Jonathan Locke
team manager

show quoted sections

Link to this

angela allgood left an annotation ()

My mother, aged 86, was invited to invest 90% of her life savings, i.e.£50,000-00, in a precipice bond, for which,documents showed Bradford & Bingley BS. (her I.F.A. under the F.S.A.regulations) recieved £1500-00. commission.After 12 months, the investment had lost £17,000-00. My mother was distraught on receiving this information, suffered a severe stroke, & passed away within a few weeks.As the only beneficary,at the end of the investement term, 3 years,I received the sum of £13,000-00. a loss of £37,000-00.on the capital.
I complained to the FOS. that this bond had been mis-sold.The reply I received, was that B&B. had NOT given advice, & HAD NOT received commission & could not make any further comments .
Some time later, I was able to prove that this commission had indeed been received,(the excuse from B&B was that they were were unaware of it at the time)
After contacting the service review manager at the FOS, it was suggested that I make a NEW complaint to the FOS.
My complaint read , "that as proven IFA, to my mother,& in accepting £1500-00 commission, B&B were negligent in their duty of care in NOT giving my mother advice".
After 20 weeks, my complaint was eventually aknowledged.After further delays, the Ombudsmans final decision,which beggars belief,was,"I cannot uphold your complaint,as B&B DID NOT GIVE ADVICE ! " She then went on to say that she could not make any further comments.

Link to this

Mr M left an annotation ()

I had a very similar experience to Mr Kerrison. The adjudicator appointed to my case was extremely slow with his correspondence with me. He made all his own assumptions as to what he thought was the nature of my complaint. When I corrected him and presented extra evidence he totally ignored it.

Then when he finally offloaded my case onto an actual Ombudsman the Ombudsman made a final decision that was full of irregularities, incorrect facts and assumptions and I had no alternative but to reject the decision.

Because the decision is final and the FOS refuse to revisit cases my bank never received any penalty for the diabolic way they treated me. A Commons Select Committee lambasted my bank for their behaviour and practices but the FOS contradicted the Select Committee findings and ruled in my own banks favour.

The FOS in my opinion have far too many unqualified staff especially at an adjudicator level. They lack any real powers and are very unfamiliar with law and legislation. They hide behind their inflexible processes when they are deemed to be wrong. I feel totally let down.

Link to this

robert mathewson left an annotation ()

I have found from my experience with the FOS that the adjudicators my one in particular has lied and contrived
evidence which did not exist during a previous investigation by a different adjudicator, she produced dates from 2010 to 2011 which are irrelevant to my complaint of 2014. Tel calls records and recorded delivered letters to the company completely ignored and now claims that I made no contact with the company despite evidence provided, this adjudicator hears nothing and sees nothing apart from what the bank tells or shows them the level of non impartiality is an absolute disgrace and is unacceptable, a complaint was made to the manager and also a higher authority within the Fos but nothing will be achieved its clear to me that no matter what it takes the FOS will go to any length tell any lie and falsify evidence in order that the banks always get the nod the FOS is corrupt throughout the whole of the FOS the country would be better without such an organisation .

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

You left an annotation (24 July 2015)

The Financial Ombudsman Service are without doubt in desperate need of an honest reform.

Those involved in the duplicitous organisation are crooked and unscrupulous beyond belief. The Chief a Financial Ombudsman is a so called Barrister, Caroline Wayman, and for a barrister to run an organisation that knowingly and purposely lies to protect those that pay their wages( the Financial Services Industry funds the Financial Services Ombudsman), over the rights of the public that they are supposedly there to protect is so grossly indecent that it defies words and makes UK look as corrupted as it is claimed that it is.

Jane Sanders used to be an Ombudsman be left when she discovered July how corrupt and injurious to the public that looked to the Ombudsman for protect them was. Jane can be found here Jane@jscs.org.uk and here http://www.financial-ombudsman-problems....

Bring and end to this corrupt organisation that purposely abuses the Rule of Law and the public's right to a fair hearing of their complants.

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

The Financial Ombudsman is a fraud on the public. The ombudsman is there as the public's agent in cases of disputes with the financial services industry. I turned to them for help and they turned a simple request into a nightmare, please if you value your sanity stay well away from them and go and get advice for a lawyer. At least with a lawyer you will know that you are dealing with a professional who is fully accountable for his actions and the advice you receive. The Ombudman's service is not, it is staffed with totally inappropriately qualified staff, that is if you are fortunate to find a member of their staff that has qualification other than a few GCSEs.

There is Infomation that is forbidden to be posted up here, Date Protection Act etc etc. however if you care to do an Internet search, a QC's view of the Financial Ombudsman, you will find that eminent person's comment that the Financial Ombudsman is an affront to the Rule of Law.........could you believe that,well I had to read it five times to be sure of what I was reading.

Then another search for Financial Ombudsman Whistlerblower will shock you ridged.

Once on this track you will find out so many things that the average person will shocked ridged to understand, and to be unbelievably incredible that are going on in the obviously corrupt manner in which UK's Financial Ombudsman's Office is being run.
That in itself is bad enough, but when you actually see the Official Ombudsman's web site and the actual Ombudsman's description of the service that they would like you the public to believe that they deliver, then the Great British Deception becomes apparnent. They, the ombudsman for whatever reason are ripping off the vulnerable citizen and smiling at you as they do so.

Some are saying that the Ombudsman is in the pocket of the Financial Servises Imdustry, After all it is the Financial Services Insdustry that funds the Ombudsman's function, but here again it is up to you the public to decide these issues.

For part part I feel that there is something very seriously flawed in the performance of the Ombudsman's duties. Perhaps that fact that there is little or no public accountabilty, in fact I believe that the Ombudsman is accountablrpe to non and this could well be the reason why they are openly able to function with a taint of draconian corruption, but here again their case history lays before then for you to judge for yourselves.

I am in the process of petitioning my MP over the conduct of the Ombudsman also I am aware of a number of others doing the same, and they share an overall opinion that the ombudsman's is not only an affront to the rule of Law as the barrister above opined, but a grave insult to our democracy!

In the name of justice for the vulnerable please don't let them get away which such abuses as the Financial Ombudsman under Caroline Wayman is a direct a front to the Rule of Law and therefore can only be termed as an evil organisation.

Correction, I stated that Jane Saunders was an Ombudsman this is not correct Sauders was an Adjudicator!

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

Been doing so seriously indepth research on the functions of the Financial Services Ombudsman and without a doubt these people are acting in breach of all the Human Rights legislation, without exception, that I am aware of.

This is an outrage. No clear thinking politician would have introduced this law and no credible peer would have sent it back without the proper amendments safeguards etc to ensure the public's protection from this rake's legislation.
The only reason I believe that this gross insult to the public ever got on the statute books was that it bought it's way there. The Financial Service Imdustry is very powerful indeed and spreads its evil tentacles into most spheres of our daily lives.
All the financial enabling act did was to introduce self legislation into the finance industry and if the financial service industry can cheat....then cheat it will. With the finantial services ombudsman well and truly on THE BANKS BOOKS THE PUBLIC HAS LITTLE CHANCE OF FAIR PLAY AND HONESTY.

Petition all human rights organisations to repeal this monstrous law!

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

The deeper that I dig the more atrocious this situation appears. It is inconceivable that an Organisation such as the Financial Services Ombudsman can be allowed to operate in the manner which it does which totally disregards the settled established law of the land.

I have always assumed that the principle of the Rule of Law applies to us all and that we are all equal before the Law.

To me it's begining to look very sinister as I thought that only a third world TinPot legislative could have been bribed to get such an abusive enabling act, which rides rough shod over Human Rights, on the Statute Books.

We must petition to get this rediculously abusive situation reversed, otherwise why did so many people die fighting world wars for the truth, and justice that the FO appears happy to deny people?

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

All citizens should be deeply concerned over the activities of the FSO. I would urge you to do a net search for Jane Saunders, Whistle Blower and Anthony Spieght QC , there you will find many links to people with a deep regret over the conduct and abuse of Human Rights of the Financial Services Ombudsman

Link to this

Scott left an annotation ()

The Ombudsman worked behind the scenes with my bank finding any possible reason they could to negate my 100% valid claim. The bank repeatedly missed deadlines but I was given only a couple of days. In the end despite the independent assessor (who is nothing but) confirming the bank and Ombudsman hadn't been in contact for the last 6 months, the Ombudsman still somehow accepted a new document that was a new version of an old document that somehow appeared from thin air! The FOS changed my wikipedia comment which shows 72%+ of Ombudsman were lawyers, and lawyers are good at simply twisting the truth.

Link to this

Iain Thomas Wolkowski left an annotation ()

Yes their tell lies to me too and i will seek legal action against the fos for lies and I also have their team manager was involved in
I reject the final words from the ombudsman and they dont know the truth about our complaints. they are not trained by legal services .

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

What I am still finding are even more serious issues. The FOS knows exactly what it is doing when it cheats you. The FOS also knows that it is beyond accountability and has virtually a freehand to do what it wishes.

And it does just that, using and abusing people and totally ignoring their Human Rights and the protection that the law of the land guarantees them!

The FOS, by its own admission, makes new law, a function that is constitutionally the preserve of the Legislative and therefore I suggest it is illegal for the FOS to be doing this.

To me it increasingly appears that only corrupted members of the Executive,(ie Bent MPs and Peers, and Lord knows we have a surplus of them) would have had the Gall to introduce and pass onto the Statute Books such a despicable Act as the Financial Services Act 2000 that openly allows the Financial Ombudsman to abuse of Human Rights, established Laws, and legal principles and presidents!

Ombudsman, and there are way too many of them, willingly lie in order to protect those who pay their wages, and for those who do not realise it .........it's the financial industry, The banks, insurance companies etc who pay their wages. Sure the Ombudsman will find for the public on clear cut issues of little consequence, but rarely with they find for the ordinary consumer where serious issues of banking/insurance misconduct is involved.

And when they find against you in favour of the banks/insurances companies...you the public have no right of appeal.....NONE!

Ask yourselves is this that what democracy is all about? Or has the country that you love been so badly corrupted by the many greedy degenerate MPs/Peers/and civil servants taking back handlers at the expense of the public's right to a fair and honest hearing of their complaints.

Many are already aggrieved and very angry over what they have found to be the case at the FOS where they lie and cheat the public at a whim!

If you are dissapointed with the FOS I strenuously suggest that you start writing to All Human Rights Organisations, especially the EU Commissioner for HUMAN RIGHTS, and copy your letter to the press, the Daily Telegraph, the Gaurdian , The Independent etc

If you let people like Caroline Wayman, the chief Ombudsman, and here staff get away with these abuses, the obvious question has to be......where will they stop?

Is this the thin end of the wedge to the unelected making their own laws for profit?

The public needs to be fully aware of the dangers to the dilution of their enshrined Human and Legal Rights through letting the FOS run riot with them!

Link to this

sandra kathryn bevans left an annotation ()

I Have Been In Dispute With Co.op Bank For years. Opened An Account Specifically To Run On its Own. money in Money Out. Long Term Suffer Of PTSD - Did Not Need More Worry. Bank Statements Failed To Arrive So Nothing Could Be Checked. Once I Had Requested The Entire Bank Statements From Co-op bank For Which They Requested £5:00p Each, As Co.op Bank Swore The Bank Statements Had Been Sent . On Scrutinising The Statements I Discovered 32 Recipients Who Between Them Had Removed £13:820:72p. Co-op Bank Not Interested. Went through Complaints Process, Which Co-op Won Of Course> Went To FOS Who of Course Sided With Co-op Bank. Went To FOS Independent Assessor Who Also Sided With The Colleagues.
I Am To Date Traumatised By co-op Bank Have Losses Of £13:820:72p. - Have Now Had To Make Contact With The Recipients And Request They Refund My Monies Removed Under Their Name Out Of My Co.op bank Account. Every Recipient Has Stated That The Bank Co-op Have To Action An Indemnity Claim ( Charge Query Form ) So That My Monies Can Be Fully Refunded.
To Date Sunday 15th November 2015., Co.op Bank Will Not Action Anything So my 13:820:72p Has Gone.
Co-op Banks CEO Niall Booker Will Not help in My Case Either, The Directors/Executives Bonus's Every Month Matter More To Co-op Bank Than The Plight Of Their Customers. All the Ombudsman's Services Are In The Pockets Of The Firms They Should be Regulating Against When Things Go Wrong. But As Every Second Passes Another Victim Is A Targeted For Identity Fraud And The Banks, Ombudsman's, MPs And PM Etc, Could Not Care Less.

Link to this

A. Clerk left an annotation ()

This country is so corrupt

Link to this

Dan left an annotation ()

Well Sandra Kathryn Bevans You are certainly finding out the hard way.

The whole place really is corrupt beyond belief, but it puts on a good face and fools most, until like you, you run into a problem then you can see the system for what it truly is.

They FOS is run by Carol Whyman, a really nasty piece of deviousness. Check out her publicly presented videos and butter would not melt in her mouth. Yet this lady knowingly employs even more devious corrupt unqualified staff who break all the rules and get away with it as they all know they are accountable to none.

And the public sufferer yet again

Link to this

Dhruti Gandhi left an annotation ()

It is good to see that I am not the only person who feels that the Ombudsman cannot be impartial and probably worked behind the scenes with the bank I was complaining against. I have just had a decision from the Ombudsman which was simply been an endorsement of the Adjudicator's decision which did not have much regard to the evidence I had provided them. The information was twisted to support a negative decision against me and find in favour of the bank against which I was making the complaint. I will take this further and apply for Judicial Review as I do feel the decision was irrational having regard to the very strong evidence provided. I feel I have just wasted 9 months trying to have my case considered by an organisation which claims to consider matters based on what is " fair and reasonable" but this could not be more far from the truth. My bank did not only act in a manner which was not fair and reasonable but they were very clearly negligent. I will be contacting my MP as to FOS's service as I hope you all have done .

Dhruti.

Link to this

Dhruti Gandhi left an annotation ()

It is good to see that I am not the only person who feels that the Ombudsman cannot be impartial and probably worked behind the scenes with the bank I was complaining against. I have just had a decision from the Ombudsman which was simply an endorsement of the Adjudicator's decision which did not have much regard to the evidence I had provided them. The information was twisted to support a negative decision against me and find in favour of the bank against which I was making the complaint despite the evidence in my favour. I will take this further and apply for Judicial Review as I do feel the decision was irrational having regard to the very strong evidence provided. I feel I have just wasted 9 months trying to have my case considered by an organisation which claims to consider matters based on what is " fair and reasonable" but this could not be more far from the truth. My bank did not only act in a manner which was not fair and reasonable but were in fact very clearly negligent. I will be contacting my MP as to FOS's service as I hope you all have done .

Dhruti.

Link to this

robert mathewson left an annotation ()

the FOS adjudicators are a bunch of liars and they do subdue your evidence , I have offered undeniable cctv evidence in support of my claim against a bank for the return of a deposit paid to a solar panel company after cancelling a contract due to damage they were doing to my roof. the bank claims my deposit was ' you will not believe this one 'for goods and services and not covered under our credit card rules' also that the solar panel people may not wish to refund the money so what is chargeback ? and worst the FOS adjudicators think thats ok, obviously ignoring the sale of goods and or services act which is supposed to protect consumers but not as far as these lying adjudicators are concerned, this one even claimed that I had the 16 ordered panel supplied and fitted despite having photo's and 2 independent reports that only 4 panels were fitted , only 10 panels were delivered and 6 panels were removed and I have offered cctv evidence to show 4 panels being carried and fitted onto the roof and 6 panels being re-loaded back into the solar peoples van when I chased them from my property due to the damage they were causing to my roof £3000 plus damage . this adjudicator has been offered the footage in 5 emails sent and he is ignoring me, he has now put this incomplete report to the FO without all the evidence to support my claim, to me that is an abuse of a public office and may amount to fraud by the adjudicator. they are shameless and are no better than the banks and you have to have serious doubts about their ' impartiality' as in my experience they are completely biased towards the banks and you have to wonder if there is any corruption within the FOs now lets start a Government Petition to get this into the media.

Link to this

robert mathewson left an annotation ()

just to say that contacting your MP is basically a waste of time as in the past MPs have been treated in the same manner by the FOS and they all agree that something should be done, they are the MPs so why did they not do something about this? .

Link to this

A.Somebody left an annotation ()

Hard to believe that the FOS is allowed to get away with the stuff they do!

I contacted them re car insurance.

Long story short but got smashed into whilst driving by another car and told must accept 50/50.

I refused contacted FOS and after the investigation they upheld 50/50.

I was livid so wrote a complaint to the Chairman of my Insurance Company who offered to refund my excess and £100 goodwill.

I wrote to complain to Caroline Wyatt and what a waste of time that was! She batted that complaint back to the adjudicator for the wrong decision to be upheld!

My advice is write to the Chairs of the big Companies and complain yourself as you will get a lot further.

Don't bother with the FOS as they haven't a clue; better find a brick wall to bang your head against as you will get further than you do with the FOS!

Sign the petition on YouGov -"Require the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) to adhere to common law."

Lets start making a fuss and get somewhere with complaints!

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Financial Ombudsman Service Limited only: