Those who do not know, in cases like mine there is an expected process to follow, if you disagree with the bank's decision. 1st step of it is to contact bank's ombudsman. That person is expected to review the case based on facts, and then provide a response. Well, I did that. Did not save my original message that I sent them, since I did not expect to even get an answer, but here's the response (and my response to it).
Notice how there are no references to any points in contract or legislation or anything like that. These are completely generic words. This is a common tactic of avoiding responsibility, when a weak person (or organization) knows they are wrong, but still wants to be "on top". Because when your 'ruling" is based on established and agreed upon rules, you are able to reference them in a clear manner.
Even in my original post, you can see that I am clearly referencing specific items both in contract in the law. I may be misinterpreting or misunderstanding some things, or may be even missing some others (I obviously can't remember all the things and I laws can be complex and overlapping, and all that stuff), but I at least make an attempt to consult the rules, and have a constructive discussion.
OP seems to not be willing to do that. There is a chance, that their next response (if it happens) will have something more concrete, but I highly doubt it. Because this has been a consistent behavior on their side, which was one of the points of original article. But, of course, I will update this article if anything changes.
