The case of G.M.
There are also unanswered questions regarding Her
The case of G.M.
There are also unanswered questions regarding Luxotix and Derda's cases.
Dear BinaryLad,
Thank you for your prompt reply on the matter.
As mentioned before there is a standard process we have to follow up a complaint:
1. Provide a reference number.
2. Provide the company’s final position upon investigation.
3. If the client is not happy with our response, there are two option:
a. Take legal action via the Courts
b. Seek the arbitration of the FOS Service
4. Once either (3a) or (3b) is actioned, the complaint is moved away from the company and if rejected it cannot be reinstated for legal precedent reasons.
On the specific cases you mentioned below please see our comments:
Luxotic: Client chose to follow the FOS path. The complaint referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service was rejected by the Financial Ombudsman Service on 31 October 2017, therefore the complaint cannot be reinstated as it will create a legal precedent. As per the prescribed EU regulations, the complainant is now free to take the legal route if they disagree with the FOS process.
Derda: Similar case to the above. Client chose to follow the FOS path. The complaint referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service was rejected by the Financial Ombudsman Service on 31 October 2017, therefore the complaint cannot be reinstated as it will create a legal precedent. As per the prescribed EU regulations, the complainant is now free to take the legal route if they disagree with the FOS process.
G.M.: The Company has sent a response to the client’s registered email address.
Thank you