FOS Decision

[loulouxx]

Good Morning,

I have an on going case with Lloyds bank over unauthorised transactions. The ajudicator has made his decision which was no. He based his decision on that he couldn't see why a fraudster would use gambling websites as they do not benefit. I gave tons of evidence that shows I was not at home during some of the transactions, like receipts hospital letters/reports. I've also given an engineers report to show that my computer had active remote Trojans, viruses and malwares, I have also given the receipt that shows we had to purchase a new computer. Even though he said he does believe they are unauthorised but cannot see how a third party would benefit? My arguement is how is that fair? Fraud is fraud regardless of why. How can I answer and question based on what a third party would do or why they did it. He also said that even though I didn't carry out the transactions I could've authorised them. I've sent in medical letters to show that my father and mother are both elderly and wouldn't be able to carry them out nor did I authorise them to.

Ive sent it to an ombudsman to have a look. Any suggestions to how I can also show the above. So frustrating as I have tied up and proved everything I have said except this third party reasons.

Thanks All

LouLouxx

[Amethyst]

Re: FOS Decision

Have you a copy of the adjudicators decision?

Of course a fraudster has benefit - maybe not necessarily financial gain - if the fraudster has a gambling addiction it allows them to continue in that without using their own money.

Is this related to http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...394#post432394 ?

[loulouxx]

Re: FOS Decision

Hi Amethyst yes it is. I think he sent it via email. I will find it and post it.

That's my arguement. There could be a dozen reasons why but without knowing who and them being caught who's to say with any certainty. Does the ombudsman ever overturn decisions? I have been looking through case studies on their website and it seems they very rarely do. How can I possibly answer those questions? Surely they knew that as anyone with half a brain would see that.

[loulouxx]

Re: FOS Decision

Update: No I haven't got a letter. I've only got letter to say that my complaint is going to an Ombudsman.

[loulouxx]

Re: FOS Decision

Is this related to http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...394#post432394 ?

No that's a separate Issue. Didn't get very with it as the Gambling Commissioner is just a fancy word for nothing.

She was my first suspect but I really don't think she would've been able to as I've never spent any time with her at home as they live up north.

[loulouxx]

Re: FOS Decision

Dear Miss
your complaint about Lloyds Bank PLC
Thank you for discussing your complaint with me today. As you do not agree with my
opinion of your complaint, it will be passed to an ombudsman as the final stage in our
process. I am writing to explain a little more about what happens next.

what an ombudsman will look at
An ombudsman will review the entire complaint and consider everything we have on file.
We should already have all the information the ombudsman needs. If the ombudsman
needs anything else then we’ll let you know.

what is a decision?
Once the ombudsman has reviewed the complaint, they will issue a decision.

If the ombudsman’s conclusions are the same as mine they will issue a final
decision.

If the ombudsman’s conclusions are different from mine they will contact you and
Lloyds and explain why, giving you a chance to comment before reaching a final
decision.

do I have to accept the final decision?
You can either accept or reject what the ombudsman decides

If you accept the final decision within the timescale, the decision becomes legally
binding on both you and Lloyds.

If you reject the final decision, or don’t respond by the deadline, it won’t be binding
on you or Lloyds. You will be able to pursue the complaint through the courts or
other avenues, but we can’t give you advice about this.


please write to
Financial Ombudsman Service
Exchange Tower
London
E14 9SR
dx 141280 Isle of Dogs 3
website www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk
what if I’m not happy with the final decision?
Whether you accept or not, the decision is final. It will be the end of the matter so far as our
process is concerned and we will not generally discuss the merits of the complaint after the
final decision has been issued.
An ombudsman’s decision cannot be overruled by another ombudsman, however senior
what happens now?
We will now arrange for your case to be reviewed by an ombudsman.
If you have any further comments or evidence that you would like an ombudsman to
consider then please send these to me by 3 April 2015. That way we can ensure the file is
fully prepared for the ombudsman.
The ombudsman will not necessarily contact you before issuing the decision, so you need
to make sure that we have all the evidence you want the ombudsman to consider.
As I explained it may take up to four months for your case to actually be passed to an
ombudsman. However, I am hopeful that it will not actually take this long.
If you have any questions then please contact me. I will remain your point of contact while
the complaint is with this service and whilst it awaits review by an ombudsman.
Yours sincerely
Email that went with it

Dear Miss,
Thank you for speaking to me today. I can confirm that I have started the process for your complaint to be passed to an ombudsman. I have attached the following documents:
· A letter confirming that your case will be passed to an ombudsman.
· A leaflet explaining more about what happens next.
If you have any further documents or comments you wish the ombudsman to consider then please send these to me.
Yours sincerely,

[loulouxx]

Re: FOS Decision

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...Bank-confusion

This is my original post about this x

[Mineral1]

Re: FOS Decision

I don't know how relevant however look up FOS case studies 116/4

[loulouxx]

Re: FOS Decision

Hi Mineral1,

Thanks, I had already looked at that but that was a chargeback. This is a fraud case. Just awaiting the decision from the Ombudsman but hopefully they will overturn the Ajudicator's decision. I have so much evidence to show that it wasn't authorised and I also can prove that viruses and remote access trojan was active during that time with an engineers report.

Kind regards

Louise Brind