what if caseworker refuses to accept the complaint citing the power granted by law

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

greencl

Registered User
Messages
36
can we challenge that in courts, my credit card was stolen as the hotel room was broken in. Bank refused to pay as i was late by three days ( it is only after 3 days i relaised this card was also lost) as i rarely uses the card. all other banks, the cards which i realised and reported refunded money after looking at evidence.

the case officer or worker at ombudsman sent me a shocker letter, the dispute is between me and hotel (where i stayed, as hotel failed to protect belongings in my view, it is the country police in gibraltar should investigate the case).the decision letter says: as per act blah, blah, blah office of ombudsman can refuse to accept a complaint on its own.
then another sentence, as hotels are not governed by ombudsman your dispute is not covered by jurisdiction of ombudsman as hotel XXXXplaza is not a registered finance house in ireland and it should be taken to relevant authority,

i thought for a minute if this is some kind of joke played by case worker, then started crying as i have more than €2500/- spent fraudulently on card, now i have no option to sue bank for €2500/- plus interest charged

question is can i go to court on such joking decision handed over to me that complaint cannot be accepted and case worker made a fatal mistake and increased my costs
 
by the way any one can help that can refer a solicitor to take up this case against Bank, ombudsman or both. evidence is pretty clear.
 
greencl said:
can we challenge that in courts, my credit card was stolen as the hotel room was broken in. Bank refused to pay as i was late by three days ( it is only after 3 days i relaised this card was also lost) as i rarely uses the card. all other banks, the cards which i realised and reported refunded money after looking at evidence.

the case officer or worker at ombudsman sent me a shocker letter, the dispute is between me and hotel (where i stayed, as hotel failed to protect belongings in my view, it is the country police in gibraltar should investigate the case).the decision letter says: as per act blah, blah, blah office of ombudsman can refuse to accept a complaint on its own.
then another sentence, as hotels are not governed by ombudsman your dispute is not covered by jurisdiction of ombudsman as hotel XXXXplaza is not a registered finance house in ireland and it should be taken to relevant authority,

i thought for a minute if this is some kind of joke played by case worker, then started crying as i have more than €2500/- spent fraudulently on card, now i have no option to sue bank for €2500/- plus interest charged

question is can i go to court on such joking decision handed over to me that complaint cannot be accepted and case worker made a fatal mistake and increased my costs
Click to expand...

Is that the same bank you owe 25k to ?

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=164911
 
yes the same bank, that could be one the reasons they are hard on me. but i agreed a plan with them and making small payments month after month.

but i cant mix that in my issue of credit card.
 
Hi green

Your first post is written in a very confusing style.

Did you make your complaint to the bank in the same style?

Did you make your complaint to the Ombudsman in the same style?

It seems to me that the behaviour you are complaining about is the bank's behaviour, so the FSO should consider your complaint.

I suggest you ask a friend of yours who is more used to writing professional letters to draft the correspondence for you.

I have had cases before, where the Omudsman's more junior staff rejected complaints for poor reasons. I wrote to the Ombudsman who accepted my argument, but then rejected the complaint on another basis. I disputed that as well, but he wouldn't budge. That was in the early days of the Service.

Brendan
 
I'm trying to understand what happened:

greencl said:
can we challenge that in courts, my credit card was stolen as the hotel room was broken in. Bank refused to pay as i was late by three days ( it is only after 3 days i relaised this card was also lost) as i rarely uses the card. all other banks, the cards which i realised and reported refunded money after looking at evidence.
Click to expand...

So if I understand this correctly you left your credit card in your hotel room, which was broken into and while checking your belongs after the break in, you did not notice that your card was missing, until 3 days later. Is that correct?

greencl said:
i thought for a minute if this is some kind of joke played by case worker, then started crying as i have more than €2500/- spent fraudulently on card, now i have no option to sue bank for €2500/- plus interest charged
Click to expand...

What kind of charges were made to your card, internet orders, shopping or just cash withdrawals?
 
Brendan and all

apologies if i confused on the question and circumstances. i will try again. my case is not even accepted as a dispute and not allocated to an adjudicator. simply rejected as dispute does not come under jurisdiction of ombudsman.

The case worker quote " As far as this office is concerned, noting that your card is allegedly stolen in hotel, your action must be against hotel for fraudulent transactions. under sections XXX the office of ombudsman can only take complaints against finance houses and financial service providers.

the hotel xxxx plaza is not registered as a financial service provider.

not withstanding to the merits of the police complaint and prejudice to any alleged fraudulent transactions, under sections XXX the office of ombudsman has the sole responsibility to decide a complaint on jurisdiction, you should contact relevant authorities in this case"

i was asked to appeal to head of legal which i did.

all transactions for the said card were made on internet, the IP address is tracked as 40 miles from the hotel and all happened on the night of break in for the same amount.

the question i have when some one in ombudsman can make a mistake what should we do, surely the case of fraudulent transactions is always a dispute between bank and customer, how can case worker bring in hotel? or if i travelled on bus, the bus company or if i travelled on flight, the flight company or the train or the taxi company which i travelled, for the sake of argument

Bank have a duty of care to investigate the transactions, the only thing they investigated is internet protocol address (IP address) and even agreed on phone that they are going to refund.

i even secured the call record where it was stated that full refund will be issued after initial verification.

may be the other baggage of disputes i have with bank acted on them not to refund or accept liability

finally revisiting my question, can i take up a case against ombudsman for such creative thinking on pushing my dispute with hotel?
 
As far as I can see you actions - leaving the card in a hotel room and failing to report its loss until 3 days after the robbery means that the bank is not responsible for your losses and it would appear that your only option is to try and recover your losses from the hotel. Assuming that is in fact the situation, then the ombudsman has no role in this dispute.

I think to have any chance of getting the ombudsman to change their decision, you need to show them that the bank is in fact responsible for your losses, otherwise it is a non start. Did the ombudsman know of the the phone call where the bank said they would make the refund? Perhaps that might be a way in...
 
Time said:
Your complaint is against the bank that issued your card.
Click to expand...

I doubt it, the OP left that card in a hotel room and failed to report it's loss until three days after the robbery - I would expect that that breaches the T&C for the card.
 
i have in past got benefitted hugely by fellow folks of askaboutmoney.com who provided legal opinion and experience based opinion rather than personal opinions. here is what i found the law applicable to Banks and i am asking ombudsman to consider my dispute as bank failed to comply with law.

the burden of proof lies with the Bank, i feel by sending them the photos of break in the police complaint i made and hotel report etc, i unnecessarily gave an oppurtunity for bank to escape,

name of the act : EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (PAYMENT SERVICES) REGULATIONS


2009 signed by BrianLenihan the then Finance Minister 08/2009



Evidence on authentication and execution of payment transactions.


73. (1) If a payment service user( Greencl) denies having authorised an executed payment


transaction or claims that a payment transaction was not correctly


executed, it is for the payment service provider (Bank of Joe ltd) concerned to prove that the


transaction was authenticated,

(2) If a payment service user(Greencl) denies having authorised an executed payment


transaction, the use of a payment instrument (Credit card) recorded by the payment service


provider is not in itself necessarily sufficient to prove either that the payment


transaction was authorised by the payer or that the payer acted fraudulently or


intentionally or failed, because he or she acted with gross negligence, to fulfil


one or more of his or her obligations under Regulation 70

Payment service provider’s liability for unauthorised payment transactions.


74. (1) In the case of an unauthorised payment transaction, the payer’s payment


service provider (Bank of Joe LTD) shall, if the payer (Greencl) concerned has given notice in accordance with Regulation 72, refund to the payer immediately the amount of the


transaction and, if necessary, restore the debited payment account to the state


it would have been in had the transaction not taken place.


(2) Paragraph (1) does not affect any other right that the payer concerned


may have to obtain compensation (including damages).



Regulation 72
Rectification of unauthorised, etc., payment transactions dependent on notice.

72. A payment service user( Greencl) is entitled to rectification from a payment service
provider of an unauthorised or incorrectly executed payment transaction giving
rise to a claim (including a claim referred to in Regulation 90) only if he or she
notifies the payment service provider without undue delay (Greencl took 4 days even before seeing statement ) on becoming aware
of the transaction, and no later than 13 months after the debit date, unless the
payment service provider is obliged to provide or make available information
on the transaction in accordance with Part 4 and has failed to do so.

i am surprised that caseworker speaks so much about law but does not know the basic legal framework for credit card fraud, or may be he knows but just want to wash the hands off by diverting dispute to hotel

can i please ask a solicitor who sees this message to private message if he or she would like to take the case and sue bank


 
Greencl can you please post up here your letter of complaint to the bank. Then can you post up the letter you received from the bank (take out all identifying features)
 
You need to understand that people on this forum do not provide a legal opinion, for that you need to consult a solicitor.

Based on everything you have told us, your problem is that the matter is not even considered to be a banking issue, hence the reason for the ombudsman not getting involved. And as I've already said I think the best chance of showing him that it is a banking issue is to let them hear the tap in which the bank confirms that it will make a refund.

At this point I really think you need to consult a solicitor as to how to proceed.
 
Saying you have a case against the hotel, is a bit like saying you have a case against the thief. You may well have, but that is not the point.

Banks make refunds against fraudulent use of cards under certain circumstances.
The bank may be correct in not refunding you.
But you should have a right to appeal this decision to the FSO.

Again, I would respectfully suggest, that your complaint to the FSO may well have been confusing.

Brendan
 
Regulation 72 refers to notification of unauthorised transactions. I understand from what you say that the bank declined to reimburse you as you didn't report the card stolen within 3 days. So the relevant regulation is not Reg 72.

You need to look at Reg. 70

70. (1) The obligations of a payment service user entitled to use a payment instrument are—
(a) of using the payment instrument in accordance with the terms governing its issue and use, and
(b) of notifying the payment service provider that issued the instrument, or an entity specified by that payment service provider, without undue delay on becoming aware of the loss, theft or misappropriation of the payment instrument or its unauthorised use
Click to expand...

You need to look at the terms of use of your credit card and see what it says about reporting stolen cards.

If the terms of use state that stolen cards must be reported within 3 days, then you probably don't have much of a case.
 
Thanks every one, found a solicitor who understood the actual case and taking up the case against the bank, if the appeal to legal head with in ombudsman fails. solicitor expressed view that it is not uncommon for case workers to give flimsy reasons as they are inundated with thousands of complaints and have an incentive to test a small guy and make it difficult as much as they could by delaying.

it is not even fault some times with in ombudsman as many banks it seems are trying to use ombudsman as an extension of in -house complaints section.

it is just one of the complaints that was stuck.

Jim: Thanks for your value add, Yes the ombudsman caseworker said he looked at the call record, but still stuck to his gun stating that even though bank agreed and 'would have' refunded, that is not enough for him to decide that this comes under jurisdiction of ombudsman. he went on further,

neither the service provider (Bank) nor the consumer(greencl) have the right to decide jurisdiction, it is only the FSO as an organisation have the right under central bank of ireland act clause xx to decide on jurisdiction.

I think this case worker, if i state actual title, he will be identified easily from website, so i call him case worker only . if he or she is allowed to let this type of reason to flow all complaints in ireland can be rejected on jurisdiction basis, citing this clause which gave them the sole responsibility or power to decide jurisdiction and power to accept a complaint.

as an example for sake of fun, some one raises an insurance claim on a insurance company due to flooding and insurance company refuses to pay, this case worker can say the dispute is not between you and insurance company but between you and department of irrigation or waste water management or department of drains or even local county council whose negligence in building drains, manage water flows etc and hence did not control water to come into your house.

on a serious note, for sake of information sharing, any case against Ombudsman should be taken in Highcourt so my case will be against the bank only if i fail the appeal with head of legal.

Thanks again-

good point on agreement-

-- standard terms and conditions on reporting unauthorised transactions for VISA branding cards is as soon as you are aware of the situation but no later than 90 days. i did not check the conditions of agreement as i dont have the agreement.

90 day time limit is an internal guideline for bank not the law,

there is also lending code set for irish banks which says same 90 days, order of precedence is

law takes precedence to lending code
lending code takes precedence to written agreement

i got the solicitor so please close the thread



smeharg said:
Regulation 72 refers to notification of unauthorised transactions. I understand from what you say that the bank declined to reimburse you as you didn't report the card stolen within 3 days. So the relevant regulation is not Reg 72.

You need to look at Reg. 70



You need to look at the terms of use of your credit card and see what it says about reporting stolen cards.

If the terms of use state that stolen cards must be reported within 3 days, then you probably don't have much of a case.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top