Soulless and Searching

Non-conformist Welsh minister, Presbyterian preacher and prolific seventeenth century religious author Matthew Henry, once said, “There are none so deaf as those who will not hear and none so blind as those who will not see” and for those seeking justice for financial injuries suffered as a consequence of the bankster driven economic crisis,  Henry’s words ring particularly true.

Recent years have not only revealed the numerous ways in which the UK’s banks have been prepared to defraud their shareholders, their customers and the taxpayer but they have also served to demonstrate the extent to which those who govern and regulate their actions have been prepared to turn a blind eye. As a result, very little has changed to the way in which banks do business and even less has changed to the way in which they treat their victims.

These days little mention is made of businesses crippled by miss sold interest rate swaps, pensioners whose incomes halved when “with profit” promises could not be kept or families who have suffered the consequences of miss sold mortgages. Instead, we are encouraged to put the past behind us and embrace the current signs of economic recovery feeling safe in the knowledge that “new” banking regulations are playing an invaluable and pivotal part in the UK’s economic success.

Cameron, Carney and Wheatley would all have us believe,

• The irresponsible avarice driven banking of the crisis has been addressed by a cap on cash bonuses (despite obscene bonuses still being awarded in shares).
• Jailing bankers for market manipulation or clawing back pay and bonuses will serve no useful purpose.  
• Getting under the skin of what was going on in the industry, [has enabled the FCA to carry]...out research to make sure the stark message issued was understood and being acted upon”
• And, accepting hundreds of thousands of pounds in political donations from HSBC does not colour the perspective of government policy

But, for those who have fallen foul of criminal banking, selective awareness is not an option and while predatory bankers and those who benefit from their favours thrive, the victims of banking crime are not only forgotten but left to battle for justice using a system which stacks the odds firmly against them.

• It has taken thirteen years of investigative reporting and a high court ruling to address the widespread mis-selling of PPI
• It took more than a decade and a government bill to secure very limited redress for those who were parted from their pensions by Equitable Life
• It has taken ten years (so far) and a Serious Organised Crime Agency investigation to raise a mere flicker of interest in the plight of the victims of the HBOS Reading scandal

And,

• True to form, it has taken seven years of media coverage and industry whistle-blowing to expose the mechanics of widespread mortgage mis-selling but still no Ombudsman ruling or formal regulatory interest.

Without access to Legal Aid or private funds to initiate a lawsuit and in the absence of a previously established track record of proven mortgage mis-selling cases to run on, my recently appointed DAS Legal representative has fallen by the wayside and, as a result, I now wait braced and unprotected for the next debt collecting onslaught from the Bank of Scotland.  Unlike the banks and the bankers, I have not been allowed to put the past behind me. Nor have I been able to get on with my life. Without legal representation, the best I can hope for is that the unscrupulous Bank of Scotland’s newly appointed debt collecting solicitors Drysdenfairfax might finally, after seven long years of my asking, chose to make use of my full case history to open the eyes and ears of their completely disinterested client to the fact that not only am I absolutely penniless but I, like the Bank of Scotland themselves, have been a victim of their panel approved broker’s very lucrative mortgage fraud  too.

As per usual, I will not be holding my breath. 

American born moral and social philosopher and author, Eric Hoffer, once said, “Disappointment is a sort of bankruptcy-the bankruptcy of a soul that expends too much hope and expectation” and after all these years of searching for assistance and, in the absence of any form of Bank of Scotland communications, here’s hoping my latest attempt to secure a lawyer, this time one who specialises in mortgage mis-selling, will not result in any further bankrupting of my soul.

Washed Up

Irish playwright, journalist and co-founder of the London school of Economics, George Bernard Shaw once said, “Cruelty must be whitewashed by moral excuse and pretence of reluctance” and unsurprisingly my experience in the ineffectual hands of the Financial Ombudsman Service has amounted to nothing less.

Established in 2001 by parliament, the Financial Ombudsman Service is supposed to be an impartial and independent body which settles disputes between consumers and UK based businesses providing financial services. We are encouraged to believe the law requires the ombudsman to take into account relevant law and regulations, regulator's rules, guidance and standards, codes of practice, and (where appropriate) what he/she considers to have been good industry practice at the relevant time, in order to make decisions which are fair and reasonable. From a current case load of over 500,000 each year (a level which has swelled its ranks by four fold since the onset of the banking crisis in 2008), it is estimated the FOS rule in favour of the complainant in approximately 49% of cases.

I am not one of the lucky ones.

As a result of my appeal to have my case against HBOS reviewed by an ombudsman, my FOS Final Response has not only dismissed the majority of my case as immaterial and irrelevant but my ombudsman states she has “difficulty in accepting” my claim that either HBOS or their mortgage broker acted fraudulently in order to secure my mortgage business.

I am told she, like my adjudicator, is;

“Not required to respond at ... length or to respond to each and every point raised” but instead has “considered the case in the light of the lending climate at the time [having] noted that the bank has said it will not be pursuing Mr and Mrs [Life after Debt] for the shortfall debt" (a statement which is completely untrue).

Despite the basis of my complaint being that my mortgage application was submitted on line by a broker I never met using an application form I never saw and information I did not supply, I am further advised;

• “ The bank could not have been expected to know the information about the purchase price and date was untrue”
• “The [brokers signature] on the application form [and the photo copied passports] confirms there was a face to face meeting”
•  “The factual inaccuracies in the application...were signed as being true”

What is more she has also informed me, with complete disregard for my protestations that her findings are based on false assumptions and not the evidence, the FOS will be publishing her travesty of a ruling on my case on their website.

Former Chief Ombudsman Walter Merricks once said, “The FOS is an unusual creature. One I would suggest parliament would not have dared to create had the ground work not been laid by a series of voluntary initiatives. It is a one sided scheme offering an unlevel playing field broadly supported by those playing up hill...We do not have to pretend to find what the law is. We unashamedly make new law”.

After six whole years engaged in battle with HBOS which now includes a shambolic, whitewashed FOS investigation into my case of complaint, I have now been thrown straight back into the lawless clutches of one the most infamous banks and their debt collectors.

I find this not only to be immensely cruel, but also wholly immoral and completely unjust.