What can I do when RBS refuse to remove a late payment from credit profile?
Comments
-
jonesMUFCforever wrote: »The sticking point for you is that you confirm that you did not log into your online statement and check what the minimum repayment would be.
If you had you could have made provision for the direct debit but you didn't.
The result is a late payment marker - as this is factually correct should not be removed.
The sticking point is actually that I understood the minimum payment amount to be a maximum amount of 2.25% of the balance. Additionally I did not expect it to be possible to exceed a credit limit with the clue being in the terminology however even if it were possible to do this, I expected it to be stated clearly within the terms and conditions. As the amount they attempted to take was significantly more than the minimum payment amount and there was nothing to clearly state my account was able to exceed the credit limit I believe these factors are my sticking point and rightfully as to why the late payment marker should be removed.
The fact RBS advisors could not provide any answer as to the points above only fuels my belief in the matter.0 -
The sticking point is actually that I understood the minimum payment amount to be a maximum amount of 2.25% of the balance.
You cannot escape the fact that you didn't even look at your statement. For a business person a pretty damning indictment as there's obviously no control over your finances. When coupled with your statements as to not knowing what you are even spending.
A clear example of why markers do work and the important information they relay on.0 -
The sticking point is actually that I understood the minimum payment amount to be a maximum amount of 2.25% of the balance. Additionally I did not expect it to be possible to exceed a credit limit with the clue being in the terminology however even if it were possible to do this, I expected it to be stated clearly within the terms and conditions. As the amount they attempted to take was significantly more than the minimum payment amount and there was nothing to clearly state my account was able to exceed the credit limit I believe these factors are my sticking point and rightfully as to why the late payment marker should be removed.
The fact RBS advisors could not provide any answer as to the points above only fuels my belief in the matter.
Please then look at that statement and tell us what the minimum payment would be and what did you think it was.
If the statement clearly states what the payment would be then you have no leg to stand on.
It is nobody's fault other than yourself if you did not log on to see this.0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »You cannot escape the fact that you didn't even look at your statement. For a business person a pretty damning indictment as there's obviously no control over your finances. When coupled with your statements as to not knowing what you are even spending.
A clear example of why markers do work and the important information they relay on.
I've not attempted to escape the fact that I did not look at my statement. I take ownership of this as mentioned in earlier posts as well as the initial post. The point being that regardless if I looked at my statement by logging into my account the payment amount requested would still have been an error on the basis of the contractual agreement provided to me by RBS as a copy of the original agreement.
I can assure you our company is well aware of it's financial position however we both a bookkeeper and external accountant to manage this so in all honesty it's not something I personally manage to any significant level.
Again, I do not agree with you as this being a clear example of why markers work and would state fully that RBS have made a contractual error of which combined with my own error has resulted in this matter. I do not doubt I should check my statements more regularly however I purposely set direct debits and standing orders from additional accounts to manage these. I rely on my contractual agreements to ensure I can forward arrange the correct funds to be in the account where the direct debit would come from.
A clear example of where the bank has not been clear/made an error and been too stubborn/incompetent to correct the mistake and instead take up a great deal of many peoples time in turn generating a greater loss as well as the fact that I now have evidence of the inaccuracy of their actions against the contract of which I can only see that common sense shall prevail and a case with the Ombudsman will be lost by the bank.0 -
jonesMUFCforever wrote: »Please then look at that statement and tell us what the minimum payment would be and what did you think it was.
If the statement clearly states what the payment would be then you have no leg to stand on.
It is nobody's fault other than yourself if you did not log on to see this.
I haven't looked as yet but in all honesty I don't see why it matters. It's almost guaranteed to show the incorrect amount they attempted to take however that is the overall point in the matter is that the contract provided by them states the maximum amount which can be taken is 2.25% of the balance. It makes no mention whatsoever of also taking the amount over the credit limit.
To clarify, it would make no difference what the statement amount showed as ultimately the amount attempted to be taken was significantly over the amount the contracted percentage states they may take.0 -
The bank has done nothing wrong. They did you a favour and allowed you to exceed your credit limit by a substantial amount which is a sign of their high regard for your custom and the manner in which you have conducted your accounts. A less well thought of customer would not have been allowed to exceed their limit in this way; the transactions would have been declined.
You are neither a child nor an incompetent; it is your responsibility to keep track of what you are spending. We are not talking about a few pounds; we are talking about £2000. If they had not allowed you to exceed your credit limit in this way then presumably your business would have suffered as you have implied that the charges were business related.
It is standard practice, when a credit limit is exceeded, for the minimum payment to be as normal PLUS THE FULL AMOUNT BY WHICH THE CREDIT LIMIT HAS BEEN EXCEEDED. This is NORMAL AND THE SAME FOR EVERY CREDIT CARD THAT I KNOW OF.
Let us however imagine for a moment that it was not. What would happen then? Should the cardholder be allowed to maintain a balance in excess of their credit limit making the minimum payment more or less indefinitely? Obviously, as the balance is in excess of the credit limit, the card would presumably be blocked from making any further transactions until the balance was eventually reduced below the credit limit. Or should the financial irresponsibility of the cardholder in exceeding their credit limit by such a substantial amount be rewarded by a nice credit limit increase?
I think you will have to face up to the fact that this is the way things are.
Your posts make no mention of whether you have actually paid this over the limit amount yet or not. I am therefore wondering how you are now managing to make your business transactions. I am also wondering how long you will be able to continue to operate the various business and personal accounts that you have with the bank if you continue with your present attitude. Please believe that YOU, not the bank, are in the wrong here.
I don't have a copy of the terms and conditions but the information will be there somewhere, perhaps under default charges?
A final thought. Maxing out a high limit credit card, making only minimum payments and paying what must be a small fortune in interest every month is a rather strange and surely highly unprofitable way to run a business.
I also feel that your chosen username is somewhat inappropriate.0 -
Here's a link to a standard RBS credit card T&Cs:
http://www.rbs.co.uk/downloads/personal/RBS-Sample-TCs.pdf
Personally, I think you're stuffed by the fact that they made it abundantly clear how much they were going to collect and when on the statement.
The link above clearly references the payment required if you are over your credit limit in section 2 (iii). As a long shot, if this is omitted from your version of the T&Cs, you may be able to get some traction out of a complaint highlighting that difference between your commercial agreement and their standard agreement for personal cards.
My own view is that you have no chance. I believe that there will be a fee tariff stating a charge if you exceed your credit limit. I believe RBS will regularly make you aware of this. It forms part of your contractual agreement and clearly implies that it's possible to exceed a credit limit.
That, alongside your fairly negligent approach to managing the account, is unlikely to find any sympathy from an RBS complaints handler, an ombudsman or a court.0 -
To clarify, it would make no difference what the statement amount showed as ultimately the amount attempted to be taken was significantly over the amount the contracted percentage states they may take.
Yep, this is all that matters, namely what are the T+Cs that apply to this particular contract and were they applied properly.
In my (real) experience, this is also all that a court would be interested in. Hopefully the FOS would have a similar attitude, rather than allow their decision to be coloured as suggested in the last para below:PeacefulWaters wrote: »Personally, I think you're stuffed by the fact that they made it abundantly clear how much they were going to collect and when on the statement.
The link above clearly references the payment required if you are over your credit limit in section 2 (iii). As a long shot, if this is omitted from your version of the T&Cs, you may be able to get some traction out of a complaint highlighting that difference between your commercial agreement and their standard agreement for personal cards.
My own view is that you have no chance. I believe that there will be a fee tariff stating a charge if you exceed your credit limit. I believe RBS will regularly make you aware of this. It forms part of your contractual agreement and clearly implies that it's possible to exceed a credit limit.
That, alongside your fairly negligent approach to managing the account, is unlikely to find any sympathy from an RBS complaints handler, an ombudsman or a court.0 -
Several people have been able to find the T & C's which show the overlimit amount will be taken along with the minimum. I really can't see why you're still questioning this.
As for not knowing you were over your limit, this is not RBS fault, it's yours. If you kept check on what you were spending you wouldn't be in this situation. It's quite simple. Arguing the toss on here isn't going to change anything.0 -
What is the date on the T&Cs ? Has there ever been a new card issued ? I have received countless T&C documents for my cards. Every time I get a new card there are T&Cs attached. They seem to change various conditions regularly and issue a new document. I find it very hard to believe that the OP has not received a set of T&Cs at some time which echo what others have found in their own and on line and I would think the FOS would take the same view as undoubtedly RBS will be able to prove they have sent them. Plus the time to argue about how much was going to be taken was when they sent notice of it, on the statement, which OP admits they did not bother reading.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards