Mother in law given poor investment advice. How to investigate?

Statue of limitations is 6 years FSO cant investigate issues beyond that even if they only came to light now

If its a case of fraud the statute increases to 12 years but you have to go to a Court so cant use FSO
 
Raging Bull said:
Statue of limitations is 6 years FSO cant investigate issues beyond that even if they only came to light now

If its a case of fraud the statute increases to 12 years but you have to go to a Court so cant use FSO
Click to expand...
..................................................................................

Yet 2for1 succeeded in a claim .
Seems to be an inconsistency here .
Also Banks/Providers still insist on (bluffing)customers that they can go via Ombudsman when Banks/Providers know Raging Bull is correct!

Need the 6 year rule amended.
 
Gerry Canning said:
Yet 2for1 succeeded in a claim .
Seems to be an inconsistency here
Click to expand...

My complaint for 12 years was rejected by the Ombudsman because of the 6 year rule.

I resubmitted my complaint stating that although the conduct complained of first occurred 12 years ago, this same conduct was repeated every year thereafter to date, but my complaint now relates to the previous 6 years only.

This was then within the Ombudsman’s remit and he investigated.
 
2for 1..."The same conduct kept repeating hence you could claim for 6 years.

On most cases your circumstances do not apply
EG.
On a Payment Protection Policy sale(PPI) , the conduct happens on the Day you get the policy so there is nofurther mis-conduct from then on.
Sadly this means the 6 year rule still applies to most mis-conduct.

If I am wrong please advise,
 
Gerry Canning said:
If I am wrong please advise,
Click to expand...

Hi Gerry,

I have no idea, I have not followed the PPI discussion in detail, so can’t comment.

Your post 22 above appears to suggest an inconsistency in the application of the 6 year rule by the Ombudsman, in that he investigated my complaint even though the conduct complained of occurred more than 6 years ago.

I am simply clarifying that;

The Ombudsman refused to investigate my initial complaint as the conduct complained of occurred more than 6 years ago.

The Ombudsman did investigate when I submitted a new complaint relating to the previous 6 years only, as this complaint was then within his remit.

I cannot see any inconsistency on the Ombudsman’s part here.
 
Two for one; Thanks for response it intrigues me.

On ppi the Ombudsman seems only to refer to the initial sales process. Anything from then on is of no consequence.So if initial sale is over 6 years = tough!

On yours it maybe that some important change to your terms was made within 6 years ,meaning that the New initial date moves within 6 years.

Consistently Ombudsman applies the miss-sell only from the date of signing/inception.He does not move the miss-sell on.

I think I can check your case if you give me the Ombudsmans ref number.
(I would love to look at it)
 
Depending on the actual amount involved, it might be best to have legal opinion concerning this matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top