Veste

Not upheld: poor customer service, incorrect routing, inappropriate advice complaint against American Express Services Europe Limited (AESEL)

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6135260 of 2026-04-07T00:00:00+00:00. poor customer service, incorrect routing, inappropriate advice complaint against American Express Services Europe Limited (AESEL). Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6135260
Decision date2026-04-07T00:00:00+00:00
FirmAmerican Express Services Europe Limited (AESEL)
Productcredit card
Claim typepoor customer service, incorrect routing, inappropriate advice
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone. The complaint was not upheld. AESEL's previous apology and £200 compensation award were deemed sufficient.

Summary

Mr B complained to the Financial Ombudsman about poor customer service from American Express Services Europe Limited, specifically that he was routed to the wrong team twice when attempting to contact the travel team via live chat, and received inappropriate advice from a card servicing advisor. AESEL acknowledged the failures, apologised, and awarded £200 compensation stated to encompass the live chat experience. The ombudsman found that while Mr B experienced inconvenience, AESEL's apology and previous compensation award adequately recognised this, and therefore did not uphold the complaint or direct the firm to provide additional remedy.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman acknowledged that Mr B experienced inconvenience due to being routed to the wrong team twice and receiving inappropriate advice. However, the ombudsman found that AESEL had already apologised for these failures and awarded £200 compensation that specifically encompassed the live chat experience. The ombudsman concluded that the apology adequately recognised the inconvenience and that taking into account the previous compensation award, there were no grounds to direct AESEL to do more.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
American Express Services Europe Limited (AESEL), all decisions60525%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website