My bank adviser told me to claim back my charges!

EmptyPurse

Today I popped into NatWest to meet the MoneySense Adviser. Much to my surprise he told me to look into claiming back my bank charges "....as they're probably illegal". My jaw nearly hit the floor! It comes to something when one of the bank's own employees is actively telling people to research the legality of the charges that they've levied on my account.:D

So, I'm off to read Martin's article about reclaiming charges. Hopefully I'll be able to put a claim in by the end of the month if I can understand the process.....

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

Are you sure he was a MoneySense Adviser and not just another customer who was also waiting for the MoneySense Adviser and thought he'd have a laugh?

Did he have red hair, a white painted face, big red nose and long shoes?

bengal-stripe

EmptyPurse wrote: »

Today I popped into NatWest to meet the MoneySense Adviser. Much to my surprise he told me to look into claiming back my bank charges "....as they're probably illegal".....

I presume, he posts here as "natweststaffmember" (and I always thought it was a 'she').

natweststaffmember

bengal-stripe wrote: »

I presume, he posts here as "natweststaffmember" (and I always thought it was a 'she').

I can tell you 100% that it was definitely NOT me as I am not a moneysense advisor.
Can I ask you which branch it was? That is not impartial advice.

natweststaffmember

EmptyPurse wrote: »

Today I popped into NatWest to meet the MoneySense Adviser. Much to my surprise he told me to look into claiming back my bank charges "....as they're probably illegal". My jaw nearly hit the floor! It comes to something when one of the bank's own employees is actively telling people to research the legality of the charges that they've levied on my account.:D

So, I'm off to read Martin's article about reclaiming charges. Hopefully I'll be able to put a claim in by the end of the month if I can understand the process.....

Furthermore, I know the difference between Illegal and Unlawful

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

natweststaffmember wrote: »

I can tell you 100% that it was definitely NOT me as I am not a moneysense advisor.
Can I ask you which branch it was? That is not impartial advice.

You need to watch out for when you use the term 'impartial'. This is from a broker website.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is considering investigating NatWest's MoneySense advertisements, after confirming it has received a complaint about the ads from broker forum cherry.

NatWest, part of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group, announced in December that it would be offering "completely impartial financial guidance" to anyone visiting 1000 specially selected branches across the UK as part of its MoneySense service. The bank has since launched a series of televised advertisements promoting the service.

However, cherry has objected to the use of the word impartial in the promotions, and registered an official complaint with the ASA, arguing that the ad gives a misleading impression to customers.

Donna Hopton, director of cherry, said that through the Retail Distribution Review, the FSA had caused massive confusion both among advisers and consumers over the use of the word 'independent'.

She continued: "What the FSA has done means many advisers cannot now refer to themselves as independent – as they have opted not to offer a fee option – hence the word impartial was useful as a means of differentiation from the large institutions who only offer their own products. However, if the likes of banks are now able to use the term impartial, this will muddy the waters even further.

"Surely, what used to be the 'independent' adviser community, with or without a fee structure, deserves to have at least one term that is otherwise strictly off-limits?"

A spokeswoman for the ASA explained that its complaints department will now look to see if NatWest has a case to answer. Should a problem be identified, it can be resolved informally if NatWest amends the advert, or else a formal investigation can be launched. If no problem is found, the case will be dismissed.

A spokeswoman for RBS confirmed that the bank had not as yet heard anything from the ASA regarding the complaint.''

natweststaffmember

I don't need to watch my words as I have not used the word "impartial advice" on this site. I post on bank charges and claiming them back and NOT the role of the moneysense advisor. I still do not understand the complaint made and the quoted article is still unclear what is being complained about.

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

natweststaffmember wrote: »

I can tell you 100% that it was definitely NOT me as I am not a moneysense advisor.
Can I ask you which branch it was? That is not impartial advice.

I don't need to watch my words as I have not used the word "impartial advice" on this site.

:rotfl:

I don't have an issue with the ads my self. They are only looking to help people with their budgeting at the end of the day, but with them mentioning 'Impartial advice' it implies that they are Independent, which they aren't, and the public can get a bit confused.

natweststaffmember

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

:rotfl:

I don't have an issue with the ads my self. They are only looking to help people with their budgeting at the end of the day, but with them mentioning 'Impartial advice' it implies that they are Independent, which they aren't, and the public can get a bit confused.

Busted!! Some days I really need to read my own posts. "Impartial advice" for me would mean that they are not selling you bank products and services which they are prohibited from doing within the review that is being carried out. They effectively remove the NatWest role for the period of time they are talking to a customer within the Branch. It is a very thin line from speaking to our Moneysense advisor because for 90% of the time you are bankified and for that period of time talking to the customer you have to remove yourself from that bankified mode of working. I can see how it COULD be seen in that manner. The training was carried out through CCCS but as such employees of a bank are not in the specific sense of the word "Independent".

dunstonh

Impartial was a protected word that could only be used by Independents. At least that is how most compliance departments would call it. So, I can see where Cherry are coming from. Although Cherry have little tact or class when it comes to these sorts of things.

I think a wider issue is that there are too many types of advisers and the general public dont have a clue what each type can or cannot do. A lot of the time they dont know the type they even see if research is anything to go by.

Impartial was also touted by the FSA as a replacement for Independent under the RDR. Although that has been sidelined some what. Yet we still see references from the FSA to Impartial and independent as being part of the requirement to be an IFA.

The cynic in me wonders how many branch managers will put pressure on the staff involved to pass leads over.

deefadog

About 3 years ago my brother in law worked on the counter at a Natwest branch, he being trained up in other areas as he wanted to become an FA, the branch manager sold him the world, then after 6 months started to realise things were not as they seemed, after a year there he was under enormous pressure to sell over the counter products to people who would obviously not want it, could afford it and would probablly end up with bank charges, all they were doing was getting cash out or depositing, he hated this as he really did not want to look like a very pushy salesman, when he was not leagally qualified ot do so. also, the promised training and qualifications never appeared, kept getting the usual "yes we'll sort this out for you soon" line. basically all the branch manager was doing was trying to get her states up by getting everyone else to do the work for her.

Even though my brother in-law in big lairy bloke, he was really effected by this bully boy/girl tactics, took a while to get over it.