Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

The BAI rejected my complaint about the Joe Duffy Show on Life Loans

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    KaneToad wrote: »
    As mentioned previously, this show consisted of people complaining that their nearest and dearest didn't understand the product they were sold.

    The upshot being that 'their inheritance' was reduced. They glossed over the fact that Mammy or Daddy spent the inheritance on themselves (the cheek of them).

    Callers were also allowed throw out any figures they wanted unchallenged - there was an element of David Drumm "plucked from your arse" about it. Brendan Burgess tried to address the basic mathematics of what they were saying and to tally it with the literature of the product. He wasn't allowed to do so.

    It was clear as day. What some of these irate callers were saying did not add up.

    i dont suppose there is a link to that particular show ?


  • Options
    #63
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    I have no problem at all with people disagreeing with me.

    In my complaint, I asked RTE if they had anyone on the line in favour of the product who had a favourable experience with the product.

    They didn't answer.

    I asked the BAI to ask this question of RTE. But they did not do so.

    The first programme was all one way. RTE should have got someone to explain the product and correct all the outrageous statements being made.

    I subsequently discovered that they had a financial advisor on hold from 1.45 to 3 pm and they never put him through.

    As well as all the people with personal experience, they put through 3 "experts" who were opposed to the product.

    The irony is that this product would be very useful for many of the target listenership of the programme.

    Brendan


  • Options
    #64
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    i dont suppose there is a link to that particular show ?

    No, but the next best thing is the boards.ie live commentary on it.


    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058148452&page=258


  • Options
    #65
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    i dont suppose there is a link to that particular show ?

    Here's a link to the podcast:

    Brendan Burgess & Life Loans on Liveline Podcast


  • Options
    #66
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,737 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    BrendanBurgess wrote: »
    I have no problem at all with people disagreeing with me.

    In my complaint, I asked RTE if they had anyone on the line in favour of the product who had a favourable experience with the product.

    They didn't answer.

    I asked the BAI to ask this question of RTE. But they did not do so.

    The first programme was all one way. RTE should have got someone to explain the product and correct all the outrageous statements being made.

    I subsequently discovered that they had a financial advisor on hold from 1.45 to 3 pm and they never put him through.

    As well as all the people with personal experience, they put through 3 "experts" who were opposed to the product.

    The irony is that this product would be very useful for many of the target listenership of the programme.

    Brendan

    I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I don't agree with the product but that has nothing to do with what you complained about to the BAI. If rte or the BAI can't or won't give you the figures you asked for is there a way of going further with it? I wonder would LL give you proper airtime to highlight the imbalance of the show, be great if the financial guy who you knew was on hold for the entire show would let you use his name.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    CoBo55 wrote: »
    If rte or the BAI can't or won't give you the figures you asked for is there a way of going further with it?

    No, there is no way of going further with it.

    I got this weird email from the BAI some time after they had informed me that they had rejected my complaint:

    Please note that the deadline for the task expires in two days.

    Due date: 02-06-2021

    Task description: Please be advised that your complaint was recently considered and it was determined that the broadcast in question did not infringe the Code/s. Accordingly, the complaint was rejected. Please find a copy of your complaint decision attached.

    For your information, all complaints whether upheld or rejected, including the complainant's name, are made publicly available unless the BAI considers it inappropriate to do so.

    Kind regards,

    BAI complaints team


    I had no idea what it meant. But it turned out that I could "comment" on their decision and the committee would review my comments.

    But they won't review their decision.

    I sent them the information about the advisor being on hold but not being put through.

    Brendan


  • Options
    #68
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    When I asked the BAI if they would be asking RTE the questions I posed, I got this answer



    The questions contained in your submission to the BAI were included in the documentation forwarded to the broadcaster when we sought their response to your complaint. The BAI did not direct the broadcaster to respond to those specific questions, though it may choose to do so. The BAI’s key concern here is whether the broadcast content infringed any statutory requirements or provisions of our Codes, so our focus is really on what was aired in the programme.


  • Options
    #69
    gordongekko
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭gordongekko


    Just like rte Brendan doesn't answer the questions posed to him. Do you have any shareholding in a company selling these products?


  • Options
    #70
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    gordongekko wrote: »
    Just like rte Brendan doesn't answer the questions posed to him. Do you have any shareholding in a company selling these products?
    Alright Paxman, you're not entitled to ask users about private financial matters.

    Topic of the thread is clear. Thanks.


  • Options
    #71
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,737 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    gordongekko wrote: »
    Just like rte Brendan doesn't answer the questions posed to him. Do you have any shareholding in a company selling these products?

    That doesn't matter. It's about whether the subject on life loans was dealt with fairly or not. Like myself you probably don't like them or the way they were sold but that isn't the issue.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    gordongekko wrote: »
    Just like rte Brendan doesn't answer the questions posed to him. Do you have any shareholding in a company selling these products?

    Hi Gordon

    It's a matter of public record that I attend the AGMs of AIB, Bank of Ireland and permanent tsb to advocate on behalf of consumers.


    I have 19 shares in Bank of Ireland - current value €88
    6 shares in AIB - current value €14
    70 shares in permanent tsb - current value €77

    If you have a defined contribution pension fund, you probably have a much bigger shareholding in the Irish banks than I have.

    My campaigns to highlight the very high mortgage rates in Ireland has cost all these banks dearly.

    My successful challenge on behalf of 6,000 AIB Prevailing Rate tracker mortgage holders has cost AIB €300m.

    Gordon

    You seem very articulate. I usually am Brendan no mates at these AGMs. It would be great if you would buy a few shares and come along and raise their treatment of customers as well.

    Brendan


  • Options
    #73
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,737 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    Alright Paxman, you're not entitled to ask users about private financial matters.

    Topic of the thread is clear. Thanks.

    What? Surely he can ask it's up to the other person whether they want to answer or not. Maybe there's a specific rule not allowing him to ask if that's the case I'll stand corrected.


  • Options
    #74
    Pelvis Parsley
    Registered Users Posts: 2,739 ✭✭✭Pelvis Parsley


    CoBo55 wrote: »
    What? Surely he can ask it's up to the other person whether they want to answer or not. Maybe there's a specific rule not allowing him to ask if that's the case I'll stand corrected.

    In theory anyone can ask anything.

    However, in this case BB was lumped in with RTE and subjected to criticism for not answering a question he had not been asked.

    When it was presented to him as such on here, to his credit, he immediately gave an answer.

    But he didn't have to, which was the point.


  • Options
    #75
    tdf7187
    Registered Users Posts: 1,597 ✭✭✭tdf7187


    BrendanBurgess wrote: »

    The irony is that this product would be very useful for many of the target listenership of the programme.

    Brendan


    Can you elaborate on this? I personally think that these types of products should never have been permitted by the regulator.


  • Options
    #76
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    Hi tdf

    This product is very useful for older people who live in a house with no mortgage who haven't enough to live on or who need money to adapt their home so that they can continue to live at home. They can't afford repayments, so the interest is rolled up.

    I would imagine that these older people are the types who listen to Joe Duffy.

    Brendan


  • Options
    #77
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    The complaints system for the BAI needs to be reformed, it is largely designed so that you don't complain.

    1. A viewer or a listner has to make a complaint, the BAI do not investigate any breaches of code that they may see, or that might be report in newspapers.
    2. The viewer or listener must put that complaint first to the broadcaster
    3. the broadcaster has 20 days to reply
    4. If they don't reply the viewer/listener may bring it to the attention of the BAI (within 15 days)
    5. If they do reply and the viewer/listener is not happy they may then bring it to the attention of the BAI (within 15 days)
    6. The BAI then send it back to the broadcaster who have 20 days to reply
    7. the bai receive responce then send it back to the viewer/listner who have another 15 days to reply
    8. You can be at 6 and 7 for weeks, as the BAI hope that you and the broadcast find a resolution. Just reply to the BAI that you are not happy because any further arguments put by you or the broadcaster will not be investigated.
    9. It goes to their Executive Complaints Board who can either side with the broadcaster or push to the complaints committee, if the ECB side with the broadcaster the Viewer/Listener can do no more.
    10. If it goes to the Complaints Committee they have 2 options to side with the broadcaster or the viewer.

    This system has largely caused people not to complain because its a long maze of a process. Resulting largely with the BAI siding with the Broadcaster, with a few rare exceptions.

    Well done for complaining.


  • Options
    #78
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    Hi Elmo

    A good summary.

    7. the bai receive responce then send it back to the viewer/listner who have another 15 days to reply

    In my case, RTE did not reply. They did not answer my questions. The BAI did not ask them to. So I didn't get a chance to respond.

    9. It goes to their Executive Complaints Board who can either side with the broadcaster or push to the complaints committee, if the ECB side with the broadcaster the Viewer/Listener can do no more.
    10. If it goes to the Complaints Committee they have 2 options to side with the broadcaster or the viewer.

    So the ECB screens out frivolous complaints? That probably seems reasonable.

    Overall, it seems to me that the steps are ok.

    But the BAI should ask the broadcaster questions. Especially if they have refused to answer the complainant.

    My main experience is with the Ombudsman.
    The investigator summarises the complaint and asks the financial institution questions based on the complaint. But often adds in his own questions , some of which have been very good. It shows that the investigator understands the complaint.

    Then after the exchange it goes to the Ombudsman or his deputy for a decision.

    On a few occasions, the Ombudsman will send further questions of his own to the financial institution.

    I have had complaints rejected by the Ombudsman, but I have always felt that his investigation was thorough.

    Brendan


  • Options
    #79
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    BrendanBurgess wrote: »
    So the ECB screens out frivolous complaints? That probably seems reasonable.

    Overall, it seems to me that the steps are ok.

    The whole process screens out the frivolous complaints IMO so the ECB seems to be redundant, in any of the cases I have read the ECB decision to reject the complaint come from genuine complaints.

    And if the ECB can reject why can't it uphold a complaint?

    For example if the Complaints Committee has upheld several complaints about something surely the ECB can use those cases to uphold further complaints?

    The system also means that something controversial 12 months ago gets a renewed interested when almost everyone has forgotten about it.

    The process is for the broadcaster it is not for the audience.


  • Options
    #80
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Also it is astonishing that the BAI some how think it is acceptable that RTÉ provided no response to you or to them.

    Have you asked them why they don't feel it necessary for the broadcast to respond to a complaint after they have put it to them.


  • Options
    #81
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Elmo wrote: »
    9. It goes to their Executive Complaints Board who can either side with the broadcaster or push to the complaints committee, if the ECB side with the broadcaster the Viewer/Listener can do no more.
    10. If it goes to the Complaints Committee they have 2 options to side with the broadcaster or the viewer.
    There is one further option, which is an extreme one, and that is to pursue a Judicial Review (say, on grounds of unfair procedures, or unreasonableness) to have the determination set-aside, and the complaint sent back to the BAI to begin the process again.

    It isn't an appeal, but in practice most successful Judicial Reviews end up with a new determination by the decision-maker that favours the Applicant.

    I can't imagine anyone would take this option, and the BAI spent none of its budget on legal fees in 2019.
    But someone attached to a large corporation with deep pockets might so do, the likes of Google or Facebook etc., or in this case, a bank.

    Of niche interest! I doubt it's ever been successfully done.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users Posts: 13,505 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    nobody who speaks honestly and accurately ever gets a fair shake on that show , the host could not argue in good faith if his whiskers depended on it


  • Options
    #83
    BrendanBurgess
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭BrendanBurgess


    But someone attached to a large corporation with deep pockets might so do, the likes of Google or Facebook etc., or in this case, a bank.

    Most of these institutions don't want to take on RTE as they would lose in the court of public opinion.

    Brendan


  • Options
    #84
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 5,450 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    In fairness now,

    1. The OP was brought onto the show and got to put his point across.
    2. During the show, Liveline tweeted out his criticism of their handling of the issue.
    3. RTE reviewed his complaint, they just didn't agree with him.
    4. BAI reviewed his complaint, they just didn't agree with him.

    Whatever else, he's had a fair hearing. It just went against him. Quite what he hopes to gain by keeping it alive isn't clear.

    The OP has (or at least had) a vested financial interest in these products being perceived in a positive light, is that correct?

    A judicical review, are you serious like? For what? No laws have been broken, no one has been defamed, no one has suffered any loss.


  • Options
    #85
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    In fairness now,

    1. The OP was brought onto the show and got to put his point across.
    2. During the show, Liveline tweeted out his criticism of their handling of the issue.
    3. RTE reviewed his complaint, they just didn't agree with him.
    4. BAI reviewed his complaint, they just didn't agree with him.

    Whatever else, he's had a fair hearing. It just went against him. Quite what he hopes to gain by keeping it alive isn't clear.

    The OP has (or at least had) a vested financial interest in these products being perceived in a positive light, is that correct?

    A judicical review, are you serious like? For what? No laws have been broken, no one has been defamed, no one has suffered any loss.

    So RTÉ did reply to the complaint?

    The JR is about the handling of the complaint at the ECB stage which offers on one of 2 outcomes agreeing with the broadcaster or passing to the complaints commission, but cannot uphold the complaint.


  • Options
    #86
    tdf7187
    Registered Users Posts: 1,597 ✭✭✭tdf7187


    BrendanBurgess wrote: »
    Hi tdf

    This product is very useful for older people who live in a house with no mortgage who haven't enough to live on or who need money to adapt their home so that they can continue to live at home. They can't afford repayments, so the interest is rolled up.

    I would imagine that these older people are the types who listen to Joe Duffy.

    Brendan

    Thanks, Brendan.

    However I would argue that the solution is to means test the old age pension, which would allow an increase in the rate without any overall cost to the exchequer.

    Many are pensioners are wealthy, have substantial (disposable) income from other sources, and have no need for a state pension. Others, as you say, struggle with the costs of living.

    I admit my solution may not be politically viable due to the power of the pensioners lobby.

    I stand by my view that the BAI/RTE complaints process is set up to discourage complainants . On that, we are in agreement.


  • Options
    #87
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,737 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    tdf7187 wrote: »
    Thanks, Brendan.

    However I would argue that the solution is to means test the old age pension, which would allow an increase in the rate without any overall cost to the exchequer.

    Many are pensioners are wealthy, have substantial (disposable) income from other sources, and have no need for a state pension. Others, as you say, struggle with the costs of living.

    I admit my solution may not be politically viable due to the power of the pensioners lobby.

    I stand by my view that the BAI/RTE complaints process is set up to discourage complainants . On that, we are in agreement.

    I'd agree that means testing would be a good solution. It'll never happen unfortunately. My mother in law has quite literally thousands of Euro stashed all over the house, if her pension was stopped tomorrow she'd have to live until she was a hundred and fifty to spend what she has accumulated. If a guy called to her door offering a life loan? Yes she'd probably take it as it would be more money to stash away!!!


  • Options
    #88
    Former Former Former
    Registered Users Posts: 5,450 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Elmo wrote: »
    So RTÉ did reply to the complaint?

    The JR is about the handling of the complaint at the ECB stage which offers on one of 2 outcomes agreeing with the broadcaster or passing to the complaints commission, but cannot uphold the complaint.

    Per the very first post, RTE did indeed reply.

    I know what a judicial review is, I'm just saying it would be an incredible waste of time for the High Court with absolutely no benefit to anyone except the lawyers. I'd be shocked if the High Court even entertained something so frivolous.


  • Options
    #89
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    In fairness now,

    1. The OP was brought onto the show and got to put his point across.
    2. During the show, Liveline tweeted out his criticism of their handling of the issue.
    3. RTE reviewed his complaint, they just didn't agree with him.
    4. BAI reviewed his complaint, they just didn't agree with him.

    Whatever else, he's had a fair hearing. It just went against him. Quite what he hopes to gain by keeping it alive isn't clear.

    The OP has (or at least had) a vested financial interest in these products being perceived in a positive light, is that correct?

    A judicical review, are you serious like? For what? No laws have been broken, no one has been defamed, no one has suffered any loss.

    At no point did Brendan himself suggest having a Judicial Review.

    As everyone familiar with Liveline knows, it is so often an agenda set show, it takes a side from the outset. This is an exposition of one such instance of it, and the people behind the show likely weren't expecting a specific thread on Boards to be started about it.


  • Options
    #90
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Former Former Former wrote: »
    Per the very first post, RTE did indeed reply.

    I know what a judicial review is, I'm just saying it would be an incredible waste of time for the High Court with absolutely no benefit to anyone except the lawyers. I'd be shocked if the High Court even entertained something so frivolous.

    If you felt strongly about something you would be better suing RTÉ rather than JR in any case.

    Though if you feel that the complaints process is made to prevent complaints then a JR wouldn't be out of the question.

    IMO the process is flawed, designed for the broadcaster and to prevent complaints.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Elmo wrote: »
    If you felt strongly about something you would be better suing RTÉ rather than JR in any case.

    Though if you feel that the complaints process is made to prevent complaints then a JR wouldn't be out of the question.

    IMO the process is flawed, designed for the broadcaster and to prevent complaints.

    Very rarely are complaints upheld.


Advertisement