Ombudsman informs CB / Regulator who act but then.....

M

mercman

Guest
Why is it that, after the Financial Services Ombudsman makes a finding in a particular case, and due to irregular activity from licensed Financial Agents/Brokers, their licenses are revoked by the Central Bank. The same persons are dismissed from their employment for serious breaches of practice. However due to half cocked laws, the same people are employed by other Financial Providers, and in a particular instance a person concerned is selling the same Financial Products on behalf of the same company that dismissed him in the first instance.

Strange but true. Not very nice when you're the effected party that was forced to bring the case to the Ombudsman originally.

Comments welcomed.
 
Mercman, I'm confused

I presume you mean someone who was employed by bank or life company as a tied agent and dismissed now working for a broker and selling same products as part of multi -agency agreement ??????? Are you sure they were dismissed???
 
leroy67 said:
Are you sure they were dismissed???
Click to expand...

They had their licence revoked and they were dismissed from their position. I do not know as to what their present position in their new employment.
 
Under Fitness and Probity I can't see how this can happen, any current or previous actions taken against an adviser has to be disclosed, in case of gross misconduct resulting in dismissal I fail to see why new employer would allow them to carry out a cf role.
 
leroy, in one of the person's case, I do not think his new employers are aware of his circumstance. In the second person's case I would not believe he has told the facts albeit the products of the same Financial Provider are being sold.

The CB have stated they are powerless although they have the full papers on file. Pure madness at its best. This was a case of attempted extortion, the provision of false figures and serious breaches of the Consumer Code.
 
How did you find out about their new roles mercman, have you considered writing to their new employers advising them to check their records?
 
You asked me how I found out ?? Believe me when you're down a decent 6 figure sum from what should of been a straightforward investment, you kinda take on the role of James Bond.

Why should I have to take on the job of advising the new employers. This should be the job of the Central Bank.
 
remind me to never cross you :) not expecting you to advise new employers unless you want some form of satisfaction
 
leroy67 said:
unless you want some form of satisfaction
Click to expand...

The only satisfaction I want is to get a refund for my losses. I believe that the same institution are making strong efforts to reinvigorate their investment business. There is enough on file to make sure that they're going no where. From the very top to their legal department and well down the line, that they will trip up again.
 
what institution is involved mercman? can't see how one complaint will prevent them from growing their investment business!!
 
leroy, I can't mention the institution for a variety of reasons, plus the case is sub judice. When the entire hits the newsflow, it certainly won't do them any favours.
 
leroy67 said:
Under Fitness and Probity I can't see how this can happen, any current or previous actions taken against an adviser has to be disclosed, in case of gross misconduct resulting in dismissal I fail to see why new employer would allow them to carry out a cf role.
Click to expand...

leroy, your posts have made my head spin !! I had another case against one of the same persons, where they refused to place the truth down. Again I had all the details and won the case with the Ombudsman ensuring I got a full refund.

Bizarre as all this may seem, I have yet again another case where new information recently became available. Unfortunately, the Ombudsman refused to reopen the case, so now we're heading for the Courts to determine on the matter.

And if the Irish Financial Providers (the one I'm dealing with in this case) think they can fool some of the people some of the time, they won't catch everybody. But as a point of fact they believed in my case, as that I had MS, they could simply ride rough-shot over me. Thankfully I have a good back up team behind me.

'He who laughs last, laughs loudest'
 
Indeed mercman,in genuine cases If something was missold the person has a right to challenge, however a lot of people chancing arms as well because their investments didn't go UP
 
leroy67 said:
however a lot of people chancing arms as well because their investments didn't go UP
Click to expand...

Not in this case ! I invested an amount (big money) because I was advised lessor amounts could not be accepted. However it now transpires that others were allowed to invest smaller amounts, before my investment was made -- This has only come to light in the past few months.
 
folks , if you check the Central Bank for the past 10 years , they have s made rules over the past decade and then let us believe that because they {spoke} all was ok. Sadly, their history is NOT confidence giving.That said the 2012 Consumer Code gives some hope.
 
salmon9077 said:
That said the 2012 Consumer Code gives some hope.
Click to expand...

Hope that should not have to be soul searched for in the first instance. I really fail to understand as to how some of the very large Financial Providers conduct their sales tactics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top