User ratings
5 star:
4 star:
3 star:
2 star:
1 star:
1 rating
Average user rating:
Comment from: John [Visitor]
I too used the Financial Ombudsman to look into the Halifax plc bouncing a cheque when the funds were in the account and cost me nearly £500 in fees and interest. After 6 months waiting for a response I got the "not upholding" claim phone call. I transferred funds using the internet from one Halifax account to another. I did this at midnight and was told by the screen that the funds were transferred. The revised balance was shown and for the want of a click on a box next to the amount, a further clarification was given saying the balance included all transfers and that at this very second in time the funds to draw against was the new balance (including the transferred cash). But the cheque, presented 9 hours later was bounced and the funds deemed to be transferred in at noon. I had even called the banking line and been told the cheque had not en been presented yet. But it had. The Halifax quoted terms and conditions, that cheques take 3 to 5 days to clear. The Ombudsman say this is why they are not upholding my claim. But I transferred cash, confirmed by the Halifax as cleared funds on the screen but still the cheque I drew was bounced. The 3 to 5 days only related to a heque I would pay in. Which I was not doing. The Halifax are bad in bouncing a legitmate cheque drawn on an account with funds, but they say they were not there but they confmed 9 hours prior , that the funds were transferred. Am I really going mad when the Ombudsman back the Halifax? If it is electronic, same branch, same name account holder, confirmed the balance has moved and specifically can be drawn immediately upon - and they are putting in a new system that went wrong which was the root cause but they will deny it as it will cost them presumably more than just my claim. So how independant when the claim is against a state owned bank. Shame on the Halifax, shame on the Ombudsman and the appeal is being written over the next 7 days.
16/12/11 @ 12:37
Comment from: [Member]
Value hunter
John, The FOS seem to be suggesting that although they attempt to resolve issues to avoid things having to goto small claims court, when it comes down to it, cases that would have an excellent chance of being won in small claims are being refused. It is a sorry state of affairs that the individual has to take a screen shot of their online banking (in your case) or record insurance sales pitches (in my case) just to protect themselves against sharp practices. It has looked to me for some time now, that ombudsman services in all industries, alongside so called regulators, are in place only to appear to give the individual "a say" or some official body to complain to, when in fact their actual results (they are not subject to freedom of information requests remember) show that more often than not, unless there is obvious malpractice taken place, they invariably find in favour of the company being complained against. Good luck with your appeal, although I have to say, reading your brief run through of your case, it sounds as though you would have a strong case via small claims court? Alas, I am not a solicitor so could not advise, it is just my own personal view.
18/12/11 @ 23:00
Comment from: rab the jab [Visitor]
rab the jab
my fos investigator intimated that my sons claim could not be upheld as the bank claimed he had not been in touch with then, we sent in recorded delivery slips and itemised phone bills to show we did 15 times, now they have changed the goal posts and asked about more recent contact with the bank FOS wrote to them on my behalf also an in court service but I dont think that FOS will be fair as they close one door they simply open another to try and find some excuse to dismiss your complaint they are despicable not fair and are not impartial and I will state before the complaint is decided on that they will not uphold this complaint as we complained before and the bank entered into a FOS agreement with us and didn't fulfill their part of the agreement by not providing certain materials which they agreed to do it really is scandalous that the FOS punt themselves as impartial they are not go to court at least a judge will take into account what you say
21/04/15 @ 17:57
Comment from: David Cannon [Visitor]  
David Cannon
My experience od asking the FOS for help is that they are there to protect NOT police the financial industry. Our regulators are corrupted by corporate power and the 'revolving door'.
15/02/18 @ 15:16

Form is loading...

« Car insurance costs record rise say the AATradesmen need to get in the real world! »