An ombudsman who needs an ombudsman
An ombudsman who needs an ombudsman
A chain of failures from beginning to end.
First, an online operator charged me €49.99 repeatedly after an initial €1.99 payment, without providing clear evidence that I had agreed to a recurring subscription. No dated checkout page, no timestamped consent, no proof of what terms I actually accepted.
Then Monese failed to properly investigate the dispute, relying on the merchant’s generic claims instead of establishing what I had actually authorised.
Finally, Ombudsfin accepted this weak evidence without addressing the obvious discrepancy between the €1.99 payment and the €5 trial described in the merchant’s terms. I challenged this and asked a straightforward question: where is the evidence that those terms applied to my transaction? No answer.
So much for independent dispute resolution. When the institution supposed to scrutinise a financial provider simply accepts its version of events and then ignores a reasoned objection, who holds the ombudsman accountable?
Think twice before opening a Monese account. If a dispute over €100 is handled this poorly, what can you expect when the stakes are much higher? My €100 may be peanuts to a financial institution, but the way a company handles a relatively small dispute tells you a lot about what you might face when something more serious goes wrong.