Misseling banks .... How about unfair customers?

Mishomeister

When I was a customer services officer, the bank I work at has introduced a Fixed rate ISA.
However you were only able to upgrade your existing ISA(paying rubbish rate) to the new Fixed ISA if you have a fee paying account.

I hve been approached by a couple in their early 70s to discuss their savings, who had a free account.

I have told them, that by upgrading their account to fee pying account, they would receive an additional £400 a year on their ISA, however they would have to pay about £150 a year for an account, leaving them better off by £250, comparing to where there are now.

I have also advised them, that they would no benefit from a travel insurance on their account due to thei age and that the main point of signing up for that account was for them to benefit from a much better return on their ISA's.
They have decided to go ahead with this.

Please note that they were the kind of people, that would not shop around for a better deal, so that thak wast the bes option they could get from us on a cash ISA, otherwise they would just keep their crap rate Variable ISA and no way gone elswhere for a better deal.

I can't describe my anger after 10 months, when I saw a complaint raised against me fo a missell, saying that they have 'surprisely' discovered that the account was missold to them as they do not qualify for a travel.The bank has decided just to refund the customers with all the acount fee they have paid up to date, due to a cost of investigating would be greater than a refund, also I was stripped off the target points for that sale and the bank has refunded them the money, however leaving them on the Fixed rate ISA, meaning they have benefited £400 by cheating.
Due to my career with the bank I came across of some of the discrase complaints, where the customer was definately trying to play THE SMART ONE an being deffinetely wrong, however had his complaint satisfied due to inwestigating costs are higher than a refund

Whils the media is full of stories of a bizzare banks, I haven't heard a single story of these sort of customers.

Whilst some of you will say that the banks deserve these kind of things for all the misseling they have done, can you tell if I - the person that does his best at work and threats his customers the best he can deserves to be punished by this sor of customers.

Please post you comments.


P.S.
If you like the post, please thank me

System

Mishomeister wrote: »

Please note that they were the kind of people, that would not shop around for a better deal

No, that was your ageist assumption about them. Your duty was to tell them "I'm sorry, but I can only advise you on RipOff Bank's products, and we do not have a savings account that is good value for you."
I do hope that a friend or relation will now help them to move all their banking business to a more honest bank or building society.
If your first language is not English, you have my sympathy, because it is difficult to write a new language well. However, in circumstances when impressions matter, I recommend that you write your stuff using a word-processor with a spelling and grammar checker, and, after correcting it, paste it here.

who had a free account

There is no such thing. All account holders are paying via forgone interest, and increased prices of goods and services because of the fees banks charge payees for direct debits and debit card payments.

Mishomeister

YoungNick wrote: »

No, that was your ageist assumption about them. Your duty was to tell them "I'm sorry, but I can only advise you on RipOff Bank's products, and we do not have a savings account that is good value for you."
I do hope that a friend or relation will now help them to move all their banking business to a more honest bank or building society.
If your first language is not English, you have my sympathy, because it is difficult to write a new language well. However, in circumstances when impressions matter, I recommend that you write your stuff using a word-processor with a spelling and grammar checker, and, after correcting it, paste it here.

Would you in my place told that to them at a risk of loosing your job?

Would be it be more important for you to tell that to them and after tell my children I have no money to feed them.

Sorry, but I don't thin that that couple, if I have recoomended them what you are sayin would help me financially if I lost my job, because of of giving them your advice.

If you work for a bank, you have to balance between the best advice to the customer and your employers expectations.

My job was to advice the customers what is the best within that bank, If I was to advise on a whole market I would be an IFA and charge a fee for an the advice.

If you want to employ me as an IFA and pay me a salary not on the profit, but purely on a customer service, let me know.

ses6jwg

There are two sides to every story.

Mis-selling does happen. Without question. I've seen it happen with my own eyes, people using "leading" tactics on non-advised sales, pressurized selling, I've seen it all

However, and I am probably going to get shot down for this, sometimes customers are not mis-sold to at all, they just don't listen.

I had a complaint made against myself a long time ago by a Lady who needed access to the money in a fixed rate bond. When she realised that she could not access the money for a house purchase, she decided to go down the lines of accusing me of mis-selling the product on the basis that I had not told her you could not access the bond. This is bearing in mind that it makes no difference to me as a seller whether she opens a 0.1% easy saver or a bond, absolutely no difference at all.

Anyway, I know for a fact that I told every single bond customer and continue to, that you CANNOT access the money early. I even recall saying to her, do you need access to the money, the reason I ask is that a bond is not accessible for the term, and her reply was "well I was looking at buying a house, but I won't be doing that now so I can afford to tie the money up for a year".

Anyway, her complaint was rejected, I can kind of sympathise with you, but your tactics for upgrading them to the fee-paying account may have been underhand?

Mishomeister

ses6jwg wrote: »

There are two sides to every story.

Mis-selling does happen. Without question. I've seen it happen with my own eyes, people using "leading" tactics on non-advised sales, pressurized selling, I've seen it all

However, and I am probably going to get shot down for this, sometimes customers are not mis-sold to at all, they just don't listen.

I had a complaint made against myself a long time ago by a Lady who needed access to the money in a fixed rate bond. When she realised that she could not access the money for a house purchase, she decided to go down the lines of accusing me of mis-selling the product on the basis that I had not told her you could not access the bond. This is bearing in mind that it makes no difference to me as a seller whether she opens a 0.1% easy saver or a bond, absolutely no difference at all.

Anyway, I know for a fact that I told every single bond customer and continue to, that you CANNOT access the money early. I even recall saying to her, do you need access to the money, and her reply was "well I was looking at buying a house, but I won't be doing that now so I can afford to tie the money up for a year".

Anyway, her complaint was rejected, I can kind of sympathise with you, but your tactics for upgrading them to the fee-paying account may have been underhand?

Well they would be better off if they have done a bond instead, however my advice was generating them more income and was more tax efficient so where is the problem of me getting something for that?

vintage_beanpole

Mishomeister wrote: »

My job was to advice the customers what is the best within that bank, If I was to advise on a whole market I would be an IFA and charge a fee for an the advice.

I agree with you.

If you did really give them the advice and you did what you could to get the point across to them, then you did your job and you should not have lost your reward. I would point this out kindly to my employers as I would not want them to think that I had been underhand or was not doing my job correctly.

Nevertheless, the old couple may have just forgotten or may just have not listened (as suggested). So don't presume necessarily that they did it on purpose.

What ever happened to 'let the buyer beware' - they could've read the Ts and Cs presumably. It's not your fault if you did definitely tell them.

Sometimes things like this just happen. Try not to let it get to you and continue doing the best job that you can. Don't take it personally.

P.S. I think that the comment above about your English was very cruel. I'm sure that your English will greatly improve as you are clearly not afraid to use it with gusto.

Joe_Bloggs

Given an ageing population it is a pity that there was not an alternative benefit for those that could not take up the travel insurance option. Perhaps spectacle / hearing aid insurance etc. It just requires some forethought from those that cook up these schemes.

The trap was set by the bank because of the obstructive ISA terms which then lead to the offer of inappropriate and inflexible range of paid for account
benefits.

Result:- Bank 0 Savvy Consumer 1

J_B.

thatsean

I think this highlights the need for a more robust sales process. If, during the sale the customer had to sign - or agree to a recorded script to say that they understood the f&b's of the product, were not advised etc and still went ahead then the bank staff and the bank are protected. Likewise so is the customer if during the signoff process the product differs from how it's verbally described. I've worked in a retail environment before where we sold products along with FSA regulated insurance, and the amount of people who would 'forget' they agreed to take insurance at the point of sale was infuriating. The fact that we had proof that they had the opportunity to say no, but proceeded saved many an employees' job.

It's not just buyer beware these days I'm afraid.

ses6jwg

thatsean wrote: »

I think this highlights the need for a more robust sales process. If, during the sale the customer had to sign - or agree to a recorded script to say that they understood the f&b's of the product, were not advised etc and still went ahead then the bank staff and the bank are protected. Likewise so is the customer if during the signoff process the product differs from how it's verbally described. I've worked in a retail environment before where we sold products along with FSA regulated insurance, and the amount of people who would 'forget' they agreed to take insurance at the point of sale was infuriating. The fact that we had proof that they had the opportunity to say no, but proceeded saved many an employees' job.

It's not just buyer beware these days I'm afraid.

If you read the small print above where you sign on application form, it usually says "I am signing to say that I have been given and understand the terms and conditions of the account"

thatsean

I'm aware of that, I meant a more specific process that forces the customer to acknowledge what they are buying - for example, if you upgrade to a packaged account with Santander they cover off a compliance piece with you - whilst im sure this is driven from an FSA point of view - good luck to a customer claiming that they didn't know what they were buying.

pmduk

No offence to the OP, but I wish there was more awareness that you can't trust a bank staff member to tell you the truth, let alone what is best for you as a customer.