Super Complaint into Cash ISA transfers launched - let the OFT know you views

Consumerist

MarkyMarkD wrote: »

Why should banks bear the cost of customers moving their money, chasing better rates?

Quite simply because the banks make their handsome profits by lending our money to borrowers. The banks could and should recover the costs of attracting funds from the borrowers who use them and not the savers who provide them.

The banks, however, are greedy and charge both the saver and the borrower.

It's always amusing, however, to hear you bankers attempting to justify your greed.

Consumerist

Just for your information

The deadline for responses was Friday 23 April.

Lokolo_2

Consumerist wrote: »

Just for your information

The deadline for responses is Friday 23 April.

It's already Sunday 25th April now so what was the point of your post? :rotfl::rotfl:

Consumerist

To notify people that they would be wasting their time to respond now.

I'll amend the previous post for you. Happy now ?

MarkyMarkD

The deadline has actually been extended by a week. :P

And, Consumerist, your point makes no sense. There is a cost of churn. That cost is rightfully paid by those who churn, not by borrowers.

It's the same as the argument that phone calls to banks should be free. No, they shouldn't, because that would be cross-subsidy from those who don't call, to those who do.

MarkyMarkD

meredydd78 wrote: »

I sent a request to change my ISA from Kent Reliance to First Direct on May 20th 2009. When it became clear that this had not been done within the proscribed 30 days I sent a letter to Kent Reliance requesting that they complete the transfer immediately and send me money equal to the amount that I had been denied (given the difference between the two rates) because they had been tardy in completing the transfer. This they did not do but they the the transfer was not completed until July 8th. I did not even receive an apology.

Presumably you checked that FD had actually requested the funds from KRBS first, as KRBS couldn't do anything without your transfer instruction?

I don't know why people always assume that the sending bank/BS is at fault.

thor

MarkyMarkD wrote: »

And, Consumerist, your point makes no sense. There is a cost of churn. That cost is rightfully paid by those who churn, not by borrowers.

Is it any wonder our banks and building socieites are in the state they are in if the pinheads at the top can't see the way to beat churn is to offer a decent consistent rate without gimmicks like short term bonuses.
Ok so their margins might be hit but they are probably at an all time high anyway. Also if churn is really so costly think about how much they could save if they looked after their customers so much they did not feel the need to go elsewhere.

MarkyMarkD

thor wrote: »

Is it any wonder our banks and building socieites are in the state they are in if the pinheads at the top can't see the way to beat churn is to offer a decent consistent rate without gimmicks like short term bonuses.
Ok so their margins might be hit but they are probably at an all time high anyway. Also if churn is really so costly think about how much they could save if they looked after their customers so much they did not feel the need to go elsewhere.

I think if you put away your crystal ball and your prejudices, you'll find that the mortgage market example 100% disproves your theory.

Nationwide tried offering a "consistent good value" rate to all borrowers, with no up-front discounts. It failed so dismally it was untrue. After a year of selling no mortgages at all, they went back to behaving like everyone else.

On the savings side, ING Direct launched with a promise of consistent good rates. A few years later, they were using introductory bonuses like most other banks.

It's impossible to go against the trend in the marketplace unless consumers act in the way you believe they should - which they don't. And the fact that you think that offering consistent fair rates would hit margins shows you don't understand the issue - it would boost margins, until there were no customers left, and then they'd be out of business.

Philycheesesteak

A&L transfer from Natwest. 3 months later I had to chase, they claimed they were waiting on Natwest, Natwest hadn't received any request from A&L. When I asked for evidence they'd asked they couldn't provide it.

When I wanted to cancel it was apparently 'too late' and I was stuck with them.

Similar story with my wife but it took that long that Natwest ended up taking the standing order to populate her ISA so she ended up getting a warning letter for opening two ISAs in 1 tax year. Fortunately for her it meant her A&L was cancelled.

I closed mine after the year as the great interest rate (which was effectively no better after missing 3 months worth of interest) went down to virtually nil.

Service Awful & Lackluster at Alliance and Leicester!!

mick_sturbs

What about the ISA providers who won't let you transfer to another provider.That surely is manifestly unfair.NS&I are the biggest culprits