One Account rates cut

karanda

Dualcyclone wrote: »

If they did that, there wouldn't be any money to do anything, RBS goes under, and one account is bought up by a less appreciative bank; rates go up, everyone loses.

Don't expect bonusses to be paid to anyone in RBS, gov't owns 70%, and the way they're pushing for liquidity means theres barely enough money for day-to-day costs. A bonus should reflect the business gained, so if some people ensure the survival of RBS, then they should be given a bonus.

I'm a shareholder, and a One Account holder; I'm interested to see what the outcome is.

Could there be a less "appreciative" bank??:rotfl:

Dualcyclone

karanda wrote: »

Could there be a less "appreciative" bank??:rotfl:

Northern Rock springs to mind

Doh

i think if they don't pass on the full cut this time, we need to implement a group facility withdrawal on a target date i'm prepared to do it, how many others would be up for it?

Princess_Coupon

didn't get my letter for the last 0.2% so rang them, thought I should ask for this one too and got the usual under review:mad:

Vancat

Doh wrote: »

i think if they don't pass on the full cut this time, we need to implement a group facility withdrawal on a target date i'm prepared to do it, how many others would be up for it?

Bet they would prefer we reduced our facilities?;)
Can't be helping them much if we are all sat on unused available credit?
VC

natwestripoff

Hello everybody! I have just joined this forum as it seems to have the most concentrated debate on the Nat West One account and others under the control of RBS.

I also thought it maybe useful to mention that I have already taken them to the financial ombudsmen. I provided a comprehensive argument that the product implied structure and that it was tied to the B of E base rate. I conceded however that the small print mentioned otherwise. In view of this I concentrated on the Banking Code at the time (a copy of which I had kept) and I made reference to their own documentation NWB 2539/NWB2556 and NWB2522 all of which were the associated glossy brochures for the product in question. These contained promises of openness and gave a breakdown of the most important elements of the mortgage etc, but of course no mention of how the interest rate was actually calculated (again fortunately I had kept copies of all this).

There is a great deal in these documents and it would be to much to mention it all here but they contained such passages as: 'the bank will give information about them (said products) in plain language' and 'explain the type of interest rate - variable, fixed, discounted, capped and so on'.

My argument therefore hinged not so much on the fact they could charge any rate of interest they liked and that the rate could be applied in any manner they liked (regardless of the loan to value etc), but that this was not made abundantly clear. My argument was that this was of the utmost importance and yet it was not mentioned in any of the glossy literature but buried in a small font in a non descript document. My conclusion was that the bank had therefore broken both its own promises (refer also The mortgage code and your mortgage released by Nat West) by not bringing this matter to the customers attention but also the banking code itself.

Unfortunately the Ombudsmen dismissed the case on the basis of the small print to which he referred. I appealed on the basis I recognised the small print existed but I had argued they had broken their own code of conduct and that of the banking code in not making this clear.

Again my case was dismissed but no convincing argument was provided why.

I would like to post my case on this website so that you can copy it and amend it as you see fit if you wish to make a complaint yourself. I presume it will be dismissed but there is a chance the ombudsmen will give the matter more attention if he receives more complaints.

As its stands now I keep hoping someone will start a class action suit! If they do I would be willing to commit much time and resources to it. I personally feel that the Nat West failed to reasonably demonstrate that this product was actually tied to nothing, not the BoE rate, not Libor, not a variable rate, and as such they could legitimately charge 40% if they wished tomorrow. If this is not an important consideration then I don't know what is! (I did point this out to the ombudsmen and his response was to contact him again if they did this).

Clearly a great number of people are upset and dissolutioned with this product and RBS, and they do seem to be targeting this product in particular. Someone has already mentioned the reason for this and it is because it is a hugely inefficient use of resources for them now credit is hard to come by. Whatever your overdraft limit is they have to have the full facility on their books (as a liability), and if you are only using a portion of this then it ties up capital which is not being used.

While I sympathise (just a bit!) the customer is not to blame and believed in the bank in good faith.

I hope this has been of some use. I will try and simply list my submission to the ombudsmen so that others may copy it (although it will not be possible to provide all the references themselves).

Good luck everyone, and if there is someone who wants to escalate this somehow please let me know..................Chris.

steedman

:mad: sorry to hijack your thread but I wrote a letter to Nationwide Building Society recently looking to redeem part of my mortgage early (I have a mortgage and a Further advance) which sits at 2.33% and 5.39% respectively the advance would revert to 4.00% SVR If I redeemed early, I would receive an ER fee of around £200 but that would be more than offset by the interest saving, they advised me that this was now not possible...what a crock, I've been with NBS for years and this is how you get treated for loyalty. They are now advising that I must redeem both parts of my mortgage before I can benefit from the lower rates. The mortgage part is on a tracker and costing very little at around 2% so you can see why they are doing this.

The party line I recived was the biggest lot of garbage i've heard in a long time. They're dead keen to get you in when the goings good eh!? but not so happy to help out.

very p****d off with NW Bull.... Society, do not remortgage with them

Doh

Vancat wrote: »

Bet they would prefer we reduced our facilities?;)
Can't be helping them much if we are all sat on unused available credit?
VC

they would u may not of had the call, but in 2007 they were actively ringing round customers trying to talk them into reducing their facilities... i told them were to go

we did discuss this a few (LOL many many) pages back, the theory is RBS only have so much cash available to lead... so we get 1000 disgruntled one account customers (whats that? there all disgruntled you say ) to move a chunk of their available facility to somewhere... 1000 £10,000 withdrawals is a shead load of cash... personaly i would be will to move more than this, i'm sure i'm not alone? I don't know if the idea has legs or whether RBS would even notice, TBH i don't know what else we can do? most people don't want a different account, they just want the original promises upheld by RBS, moving accounts therefore doesn't fit the bill and the onbudsman don't seem particularly interested... my MP was a waste of time (conservative too - remind me not to vote them in)

any other ideas?

natwestripoff

Hi Vancat, thats interesting - they have been trying this for some time if you go back through the threads. The reason is because the money your not using (on the overdraft) has to be put on the banks books even if its not being used. From their point of view the money is tied up and they are not earning anything on it, and furthermore such cash is valuable right now.

In the current climate an overdraft mortgage is a huge millstone around their neck (hugely inefficient), hence they are not passing on interest rate cuts in the hope people re-mortgage with someone else. Unfortunately for them there are very few products available so it is not happening! I am going to reduce my mortgage to £1 (I am fortunate that I can) and this will tie up £95,000 (my agreed limit). Even putting the rates up wont matter not on a pound!

Catch you later Chris.

karanda

natwestripoff wrote: »

Hi Vancat, thats interesting - they have been trying this for some time if you go back through the threads. The reason is because the money your not using (on the overdraft) has to be put on the banks books even if its not being used. From their point of view the money is tied up and they are not earning anything on it, and furthermore such cash is valuable right now.

In the current climate an overdraft mortgage is a huge millstone around their neck (hugely inefficient), hence they are not passing on interest rate cuts in the hope people re-mortgage with someone else. Unfortunately for them there are very few products available so it is not happening! I am going to reduce my mortgage to £1 (I am fortunate that I can) and this will tie up £95,000 (my agreed limit). Even putting the rates up wont matter not on a pound!

Catch you later Chris.

I think this is an excellent idea. I have been thinking for some time now to cash in my cash Isas and throw the money into the One Account - and come April I will do just that. I cannot wait to be done with RBS - and if I can cause them a fraction of the grief they have caused me, so be it.

PS I have also noticed in the press today that RBS have failed to dispose of many of their other products (Churchill Insurance etc). Not that I would contemplate every doing business with any company owned by RBS ever again.