OpinionMay 1 2013

Honesty and playing by the rules

Search sponsored by

I have only had one complaint and it did not get as far as the Fos as it came from a solicitor and we showed the evidence to that solicitor who rapidly backtracked.

The only complaints I have been involved with have been due to mistakes or poor advice from banks or their subsidiaries. Nearly every one was rejected by the bank or their subsidiary, rejected by the adjudicator as he did not know anything about banking law or financial services and overturned in our client’s favour once the actual ombudsman looked at the facts and had the legal position pointed out to him.

This included the failure of Fos staff to extract all appropriate information before making their decision, which in the case of Barclays included failing to provide the stockbroker’s voice recordings which proved the client and I were telling the truth.

Fos is not fit for purpose. All my clients are told that there is a 15-year long-stop which the Fos, its staff and clients ignore at their peril. It is explained that if someone ceases to be a client and fails to use basic common sense and take fresh advice within 15 years from that point, if they choose to act outside common law then at 15 years and one day, dependent on the circumstances, I then being old and doddery by then may well ignore common law too.

My clients know they are dealing with an honest man and know not to deal with me dishonestly and then expect me to accept them acting outside common law when I have warned them, I will play by the rules provided they do. If not they have been duly warned and there are still plenty of other advisers out there who will stitch them up first.

Phil Castle

Financial Escape