I don't Understand RBS applications !

Dannydebt

I applied online for a RBS Key Account (The basic account) I don't have any CCJs or bankrupt, got accepted online and got forms through the post, signed them and sent them back last Wednesday and today I get a letter from Glasgow to say thanks but no thanks !, yet I thought that ANYONE got one of these accounts !.

Is it worth trying NATWEST for a Step Account or will it be the same answer since they are the same bank ?.

Thanks for reading.

benoit

After approving in principle they send your application to thier review department for further checks & that's where some people fail.

halight

Hi always worth trying natwest.
I would also contact RBS and ask them why.
Anyone should be able to get a basic account.

HSBC CO-OP also have basic accounts thay yo can apply for over there web sites.

All the best.

cifpower

There is no point applying with NatWest as RBS own them and operate off the same system. You could try Halifax's Easycash (comes with a Visa Electron and they only do an ID check)

Bosie

:eek:

halight wrote: »

Hi always worth trying natwest.
I would also contact RBS and ask them why.
Anyone should be able to get a basic account.

HSBC CO-OP also have basic accounts thay yo can apply for over there web sites.

All the best.

unfortunately not always:mad: I got turned down for Abbey basic and also a LLoyds basic. Yet if you look at my signature look what I have got, yet those banks said get lost!!
I don't understand really, because there is no fraud on my files and I am on the electoral roll.

Bosie

Dannydebt wrote: »

I applied online for a RBS Key Account (The basic account) I don't have any CCJs or bankrupt, got accepted online and got forms through the post, signed them and sent them back last Wednesday and today I get a letter from Glasgow to say thanks but no thanks !, yet I thought that ANYONE got one of these accounts !.

Is it worth trying NATWEST for a Step Account or will it be the same answer since they are the same bank ?.

Thanks for reading.

Danny, did you at one time have any previous debt with RBS/Natwest?

Dannydebt

Bosie wrote: »

Danny, did you at one time have any previous debt with RBS/Natwest?

Hi, Yes I had an account written off at RBS around 1999, but surely they would not keep records that long (Would they ?), I did have a Natwest Step Account a few years back, ran it well but closed it as I thought I would not need it again, so it might be worth applying to Natwest as they let me have the account after the RBS write off last time round ?.

Thanks.

Dannydebt

cifpower wrote: »

There is no point applying with NatWest as RBS own them and operate off the same system. You could try Halifax's Easycash (comes with a Visa Electron and they only do an ID check)

Hi, Just a quick follow on. I decided to make the trip to Natwest and got accepted for the Step Account right away, got the account number and promised card in a few days, so I can't figure it out !.

chambta

Dannydebt wrote: »

Hi, Yes I had an account written off at RBS around 1999, but surely they would not keep records that long (Would they ?), I did have a Natwest Step Account a few years back, ran it well but closed it as I thought I would not need it again, so it might be worth applying to Natwest as they let me have the account after the RBS write off last time round ?.

Thanks.

Yes they would.

That's your answer.

Ryan101

chambta wrote: »

Yes they would.

That's your answer.

I thought that banks only kept records for 6 years, and destroyed all records within a set period of time once an account had be closed, data protection and all that.

Not sure I would like my bank keeping details on me since 1999 if I was no longer with them, and makes you wonder what the time limit for keeping records actually is, or is it unlimited ?.

robbo990

Am I not right in thinking that would be unlawful - as the Data Protection Act states that information can only be stored for a reasonable time.

Financial Institutions are required to store information for up to 6 years only . Any longer than that would be unreasonable and in breach of the Act