Financial Conduct Authority レビュー 16

Utterly useless.8 years to bring criminal to court who defrauded me and got 30months sentence because they are incompetent.They will say anything to protect themselves but as far as I am concerned the mental and physical harm caused to my family foes far beyond this.They always make excuses and should be shut down and a new organisation set up to defend vulnerable customers.Run by old people who are dinosaurs and only think about themselves.

I think I might have touched a raw nerve about the regulation of pension providers in the U.K. As the ex-employee of an Aviva contractor, I filed a whistleblowing report to the FCA after discovering Aviva had failed to claim and add five-and-a-half years of tax relief to my workplace pension. Apparently, Aviva and my employer were both unaware that the Scheme was ‘misclassified’ as salary sacrifice instead of tax ‘relief-at-source’ - for seven years, since inception, and despite audits, including of payslips. And despite the same Aviva-integrated software being used to generate the payslips and pay over monthly premiums. It was also unaware of a contribution payment that was missing entirely from January 2020 until mid-2025, multiple late contribution payments, including later than 90 days - all uncompensated for investment growth - and contribution payments that had contradicted and underfunded the policy documents/Joiner File/“FCA Keyfacts” culminating in thousands of pounds over each and every month of my employment - for five-and-a-half years. Not one contribution payment was ever received by Aviva which matched the “FCA Keyfacts” contribution structure in the policy documents Aviva sent me, which the FCA regulatory wording said I was “buying”. The FCA call centre turned me away as a whistleblower because I was not employed directly by Aviva. It couldn’t tell me if “FCA Keyfacts” are legally binding because it is “not legally trained” nor which rules/regulations/laws it enforces. I was subsequently accused of a “likely” breach of the FCA’s “Unacceptable Behaviour Policy” due to “frequency of contact” and alleged refusal to accept explanations of the FCA’s role. But they got the name wrong of the company I worked for. I naively contacted the FCA because (a) many thousands of pounds were missing from our workplace pension scheme - (b) nobody knew and (c) alerting Aviva was nigh on impossible. Nobody knew, according to Aviva, because its processes failed. Aviva says the processes are under review. But were they bespoke to my pension scheme? I suspect not. And the FCA won’t say. Based on my experience of the FCA’s customer-facing staff, I would not approach the FCA again as they appear more concerned about the “unacceptable behaviour” of a justifiably-aggrieved, shortchanged pension policyholder and whistleblower than the unacceptable behaviour of an organisation they regulate. Certainly don’t expect a pat on the back for my “frequency of contact” with Aviva which eventually resulted in the uncovering of systematic failings, significant sums absent the Scheme - and for raising the alarm to the relevant authority.

The FCA should have instructed Car Finance Companies to examine their records & deal directly with relevant registered customers regarding refunds.
Instead the FCA have opened the flood gates to dodgy claim companies & dubious solicitor outfits & various scammers.
This exercise has dragged on for far too long & the FCA have still not finished consulting with the finance companies on a compensation scheme.

I sent numerous concerns about corruption at the Financial Ombudsman Service and Nationwide fraud. The FCA simply ignored my messages. The are pointless, toothless, corrupt and incompetent.

So this FCA is clearly another scam. They try their best by phishing info from you. DON’T GIVE THEM ANY!!!! It’s bad enough they got my email. Shoot the first email they sent to me they called me Ahmed. Lmao. Guy clearly typed his own name before sending me another email stating the same info just no name. All sent by a “Polly Grey”. If they can’t even get my name right the first time that’s a huge red flag. Don’t fall for this scam. It’s just another way to try to get money from you.

LV car insurance paid OVER £3000 for a claim for two superficial scratches. The owner of the damaged vehicle accepted the extent of this damage but submitted a claim for a 'write-off' to include pre-existing substantial damage.

The Ombudsman service assessed LV's conduct as fair but repeatedly refused to answer plain questions about the assessment process used to determine the validity (or in this case non-validity) of the claim.

I see that my 1* review is widely replicated by others. This FCO is clearly biased and designed to protect providers - insurers, banks etc - rather than providing a dispassionate assessment of submissions. Why should taxpayers pay for this appalling, shabby, outfit?

They contact me for giving my robbed crypto money back. First Alan want me to use Anydesk, then he try to phising 900 euros via crypto.com teling that it would be contact between my bank and crypto.com, then he admin that it is fee to them.Lucky me I didn`t have money and I gave old band card information.
Scammers want to show some unbeliveble site CoinMarketCap where in your name is lot of money. That`s all are fooling. Everyone can make those big money to CoinMarketCap site, see tutorial in youtube.
Scammer, doun`t bolive that shit what they say

I am extremely disappointed with the lack of response and assistance from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regarding a complaint I filed three months ago.

On 12th December 2024, I submitted a formal complaint against Bosch over a faulty Bosch Series 2 7kg washing machine (purchased for £399), which experienced a critical electronic failure just after two years. Despite multiple attempts to resolve the issue directly with Bosch, their response was unsatisfactory. They refused to offer compensation or a fair resolution, forcing me to purchase a new washing machine.

I turned to the FCA for advice and intervention, seeking help to obtain a refund or compensation based on the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I provided all necessary documentation, including proof of purchase, product details, and correspondence with Bosch.

However, after three months, I have received no reply, no update, and no resolution from the FCA. The complete lack of communication and failure to assist in this matter is unacceptable. I expected a much higher standard of service and support from a government body that is supposed to protect consumer rights.

As it stands, I am left with no recourse for the financial loss and inconvenience caused by Bosch’s defective product and their poor customer service. I would strongly advise anyone considering seeking assistance from the FCA to be cautious, as their response time and support appear to be severely lacking.

David Gale

Sono la stessa truffata ad Agosto 2024
Scrivo questa recensione per smascherare un nuovo tentativo di truffa, sicuramente lo step successivo a quello di Ameriprise, società clone utilizzata dai truffatori per riuscire nel loro tentativo:
sono appena stata contattata da un numero mobile, si è presentato come Mario Sarno, della Financial Conduct Autority per dirmi che ci sono dei Bitcoin a me intestati, e che facendomi scaricare un’app mi può aiutare a trasformare questi Bitcoin in euro; questa è un’ulteriore truffa, sono gli stessi truffatori…mi ha chiamata da un numero mobile +366 che ora ho già cancellato, e mi ha successivamente tentato di videochiamare da un numero con prefisso inglese per fare in modo che la società risulti effettivamente inglese, il numero è ‪+44 7360 356589‬.
Ho bloccato tutto, ho segnalato anche il numero a whatsapp;
non potendo inserire link, vi scrivo il titolo di un video che spiega molto bene l’ennesima truffa in questione, e a parlare è un’avvocato penalista: ‪Contattati dalla FCA (Financial Conduct Authority).
Cosa succede? • Avvocato truffe online

Spero di essere utile a qualcuno.
Purtroppo essendoci capitata una volta hanno il mio numero e tentano costantemente di riprovarci.

If you complain to the FCA, it will take 'up to 90 days' (their words) for an investigator to look into your complaint. In my case a savings account is blocked by a certain company so I can't release my savings, so 90 days is far too slow to be useful. I think dodgy companies know this and behave accordingly. A watchdog with no teeth, I'm afraid to say.

On 5 July 2024, the Labour Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, hailed his win as historic, saying: “Change begins now” and further saying that he will lead a “government of service” on a “mission of national renewal” and promised to "rebuild Britain."

Six months later, change has not yet come to the Financial Control Authority (FCA), an entity with no apparent mission, no apparent responsibility and no accountability.

On 29 August 2024 I contacted the FCA regarding a matter involving £47.5 Million Pounds Sterling and the HM Treasury, Revenue & Customs [Cryptocurrency Recovery Division] London UK.

The response was a message that was enquiry had been assigned Case Ref #: 211087639.

A further response? Nil.

A declared outcome to my request for an investigation of unethical behaviour by HM Treasury? Nil

This is a pathetic outcome.

Do I complain to the parliamentary wing of government or do I speak with the UK tabloid press about this alleged gross injustice?

I gave it one star but really that should be 0. These people don't care. I had done what they recommended with my own common sense. They were not interested as well as the other organisations I contacted It seems people are allowed to scam you and get away with it, The Financial Omudsman, Action Fraud all think that its right that Booking.com don't pay up what the Royal Hotel In Whitley Bay owe me. There is no justice and the people are useless. What are they getting paid for?

The Financial Conduct Authority needs to answer some serious questions following last week’s PREDICTABLE Court of Appeal judgement. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of three consumers on October 25, concluding finance brokers, such as car dealers, could not take commission without disclosing the amount and how it would be calculated to the consumer

Complete Crooks

Invented stories about recovering funds if advance payment was made just for a few hours and returned when funds released. Then disappeared without any availability.

SAFEGUARD ALARM the FCA admit in 2024 Annual Review Webinar at 108 minutes (its on FCA website). The FCA alert of importance of lived experience of Consumer Duty and FAILURE in COVID Lockdown to safeguard a vulnerable widow and 3 children denied her husband's and their fathers life insurance of £450k. I am the widow named in the FCA broadcast as Amy Lawson-Gill and Sheldon Mills a qualified Lawyer and FCA Director answered, firms MUST process a death SETTLEMENT claim according to contracts TERMs to administer the life protection with high sensitivity due to vulnerability.  DELIVERY FAILURE of contract terms dismissed by Ombudsman because 2010 contracts specify "Not to be held in trust" but the financial advisor had a conflict of interest, she did replacement sales in 2010 CHURNED 2005 contracts also not held in trust to falsify £15k commission for herself replaced same AVIVA policies when selling the mortgage (also grossly falsified income to avoid mortgage rejection unbeknownst to couple/widow until 2023, 4 life policies replaced intent to harm clients. Aviva breach data protection, duty of care to support FAKE sales (illegal cartel MARKET ABUSE) despite same firm (SJP) fined in nov 2003 £250k report by FSA for SAME replacement sales, churned money into investments (trust bond) in money laundering. The Ombudsman is DANGEROUS/RECKLESS, disregards death claim breach (2020) refuse review support fraud/theft to breach contracts, expects Amy/widow to safeguarded herself instead of questioning firms for illegal activity. Financial advisor falsified documents from 2010 to 2021 thru policy term, gave harmful inaccurate OUTCOME
policies PROTECTED couple. Advisor hid 4 uncheck trusts breach COBS 16.6.2 and UTCCR 1999 S5, contracts unchanged, data shows corruption papertrail despite this the death claim specified payment to widow to Barclays but advisor verbally intercepts death claim without legal authority instructs Aviva to pay Lifefunds into WRONG BANK to deny widow then denied a review by Aviva / St James Place. Ombudsman supports fraud disregards FCA, refuse review insists son as rogue trustee by forgery to block, control to deny mother access, that son must agree to review by Ombudsman despite threat to kill mother in domestic/financial/economic abuse.

Discretionary trust a sham created only to temp receive money for laundering, drained immediately by advisor to reallocate funds into trust bond at £25k/yr high yield commission for advisor thus far £100k received and rewrote 2 sons as only beneficiaries.

Inserting rogue son breached hidden trust deed 2010, 2010 contracts "not to be held in trust" replaced 2005 breach COBS 9.4 assessing client suitability
Advisor internal data admits deception to insert 2nd son to control/abuse his mother/widow to deny family life protection as funds were drained from discretionary trust reallocated into trust bond rewrote exclusively 2 of 5 sons as ONLY beneficiaries supports financial/economic abuse by breaches and deceptive administration.

The FCA is UNFIT for purpose breach s149, Equality act, public sector duty to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and human rights. Advisor falsified accounts that husband was still alive to portray false income when processing death claim.
breach of art. 5, 9, 22 DPA 2018, UN Convention harm of children vulnerable/bereaved. Outcry in financial services industry HARMS CONSUMERS and FSA 2012 s.82(4)a, public at risk.
FCA DISREGARD their own ALERTS NO pursuit of HARMFUL firms or Ombudsman supporting fraud. 2 Ombudsman agreed review on MP3 immediately replaced by 3rd ombudsman (Mandeep Kang) 4th, Iffat Luba also refuse review 2021 (SYSC 5.1) insists abusive estranged son fraudulently inserted as trustee to control/commit financial/economic abuse must give his permission for the Ombudsman review to proceed despite threatening to kill his mother reported to police in feb 2022. The regulators support violence against bereaved women/children!
The son was never a client, (only clients were couple) breaches COBS 2.1 to act in the 2 clients best interests.
WARN: equality, human and protection rights disregarded by FCA, financial industry regulators are supporting violence/harm against women/children. FCA Consumer Duty a sham.
Widows 8 yr old son also threatened 2024 to be stabbed with knife following an incident created by Aviva CEO email threat to widow on Fri 13th Sept 2024 led to disagreement, widow defended/protect 8 yr old child. All violence created by multiple failure by firms/regulators to protect widow, allow theft of £450k life funds, refuse review/remedy
Warn: public Regulatory support towards violence, harm, fraud against women/children

FCA are a not fit for purpose regulatory authority. They refused to investigate the Newcastle, Leeds and Nottingham building societies who are responsible for targeting over 2000 over 60 year old customers selling them unregulated products and encouraging them to set up inappropriate trusts to put their savings into. The Newcastle building society avoids their regulatory responsibility by appointing third party financial advisors who promoted products that led to customers losing homes and life savings.