Do banks have a duty of care for their elderly customers?

krisskross

inmypocketnottheirs wrote:

This attitude is very probably why banks don't give a damn about their customers. If it is cheaper to refund than to fully investigate, then there is clearly no incentive to do the right thing in the first place. Banks can therefore act with impunity and without any duty of care to their customers.

Troll has fully illustrated the poor standard of banking we have become accustomed to in the UK.

I still fail totally to see what the problem is. A couple went into the bank seeking to borrow money. They were lent the money. Then had buyer remorse so to speak. We are told they are both compos mentis. Don't understand why the bank is a big bad ogre for lending it to them. Wonder why they didn't ask advice from family members BEFORE signing up to another unnecessary loan.

Steve_xx

Tootsie_Roll wrote:

No they haven't




They don't - the bank have made a mistake - the cooling off period only applies to agreements that weren't signed on the bank's premises.

Suppose that's another claim for compensation !!

Whichever way you like to put it, it appears that the two people were not fully aware of what they had gotten into until after the event. Therefore, the bank has acted over-zealously. Had the bank staff openly advised them that the whole deal would cost them substantially more than they were anticipating, then they would certainly not have signed on the dotted lne.

Steve_xx

krisskross wrote:

I still fail totally to see what the problem is. A couple went into the bank seeking to borrow money. They were lent the money. Then had buyer remorse so to speak. We are told they are both compos mentis. Don't understand why the bank is a big bad ogre for lending it to them. Wonder why they didn't ask advice from family members BEFORE signing up to another unnecessary loan.

That's a nice, clinical way to put it. Except that they didn't have "remorse" as such. What they had was a deal that was adjusted/altered and one that would cost them more than the original deal.

They may well be compos mentis for the greater part. But you don't have to be old to suffer at the hands of unscrupulous lenders with an eye on a commission rake.

Clearly, they were not properly told, in a manner that they could grasp, of the pitfalls of doing the deal. Only when they got home and they were able to study the deal at length did they discover that all was not quite as they thought.

Maybe they did not ask family member BEFORE they did the deal because they may mistakenly have preferred to believe that their bank would not seek to con them. Therefore their only error was in trusting the bank to advise them clearly and properly.

regularsaver1

Maybe the branch was not informed by "head office" of the 14 days cooling off - well they are not going to advertise it are they

in the bank i work for interest accrues from day one - originally is paid back in 14 days it would have been the same balance borrowed - not now