25 Feb 2015

A question about : Section 75 claim rejected by CC Co and Ombudsman adjudicator, Appeal timescale

If wrong forum please let me know.
I made a Section 75 claim against Tesco which was rejected. I appealed to the Ombudsman and their adjudicator also rejected my claim.

I was advised that I could ask for this to be reviewed by an actual Ombudsman. I was given 14 days to ask for a review and supply any additional info, or to advise if I could not meet the 14 day deadline.

I've advised that I want a review but would not be able to supply the additional information in the 14 days. I have been given an additional 10 days from the original deadline.

I still don't believe that this is sufficient time to fully put together my case.

I can't see anywhere about such time restrictions on supplying the additional information.

Does anyone have any knowledge about time limitations on supplying additional information for a review ?


Best answers:

  • You really need to explain what your S75 was over, why the bank rejected it, why the Adjudicator rejected it and what additional information you are expecting to bring to the case that isn't readily available in 3 weeks given the time scale of this complaint
  • What was the basis of your claim?
    You do know you can sue Tesco?
  • If you've been involved with this for long enough for both Tesco and the Adjudicator to consider and reject your complaint and you've been given 24 days since then I can't see why your case wasn't ready to go on day 1 of the 24. The only viable reason is that in reality you don't have a good case, and you're now wondering what you can do to add to it to make it look better.
  • Claim is for repair to failed gearbox / clutch.
    After repair (parts of gearbox) failed again within 24 hours, returned to garage, who bled the clutch. Again failed next time tried to use. Taken to another garage as lost all faith in original. Diagnosed clutch fault (is an integral part of gearbox so should have been diagnosed originally). Tesco rejected as no breach of contract - verbal contract was to repair the fault.
    Ombudsman accept verbal contract, but believe that garage carried out work with reasonable care and skill so rejected claim.
    Garage (supposed clutch & gearbox specialist) has closed down, various negative comments on web about them, lots of info on web about similar problems with this particular gearbox.
    What I'm looking for is info on the timescale for putting together all this additional information we're finding.
  • I think the timescale they have given you is more than generous. You can't search the internet indefinitely to support your claim. Regarding the garage other people's personal opinions are not evidence. Your evidence has to support your personal claim. If you can provide info that their is a genuine fault with the part you may have a claim but surely that would be against the manufacturer of the part not the garage that did the work. Did they do a mass recall for example as a result of this known fault if not may be hard to prove.
  • The problem is a common one out of warranty. The claim is against the repair not being carried out properly, not for the initial failure
    What I'm trying to clarify is the timescale for supplying further info to the Ombudsman.
  • If Tesco have ruled against you and the Ombudsman has ruled against you and the garage is no longer trading you are left with one option - sue Tesco cards.
    Why do you not issue court papers to see if they change their stance - after all you do seem to think you have a 100% case right?
  • vw box by any chance?
  • Why do you need more than 24 days?
  • Echo the above, your case should have been fully prepared before taking it to the ombudsman in the first place, you had up to 6 months to do that.
    The 24 days should just be to respond to the comments they have raised but it really should just be fine tuning.
    At the end of the day the ombudsman is not binding on you and so if you cannot meet their timescales you are still free to go down the legal route and issue court proceedings. Be aware there too though you need to prep first not issue first and then think about what you need afterwards.
  • Your appeal should really be based on that the ruling has not taken x point into consideration or not correctly addressed y and not thinking of new points to be looked at.
  • The FOS don't give you information on how they work, that would make it too easy!
    There are lots of posts on this forum about banks being given months to submit material (i.e. because they ignore FOS correspondence and submit when allocated to an ombudsman).
    In normal circumstances, it would take months for Ombudsman allocation so you could submit material now and more later.
    However, the FOS could screw you over and say a final decision has already been produced at point of submitting more material.
    You could close your case and re-open it. A couple of years ago, the FOS re-opened cases that had been closed for a couple of months.
    The problem is whenever you get into dialogue or contest anything to do with operations, you end up losing your case.