Chorley Building Society

MissConception

This is another fine example of what is so poor about our Financial Services industry.

Having opened an account for my son whilst he was under age I was aware that he could no longer hold it past age 18. Before his 18th birthday I contacted the Chorley and asked about transferring the money. They said the "best thing to do" was wait until after he was 18, that they would put the money into their standard account and it could either be kept there or transferred.

1. They should have contacted me with options not just effected the transfer.

2. They should have listened to what I wanted not just carried on in their own way.

3. They opened a new account improperly, without all the FSA checks being done.

4. They refused to transfer the money or even let him have a passbook until he proved who he was.

5. They were told that he simply wanted the money back but nevertheless completed the opening process and passbook issue.

6. They then insisted on needing a letter to close the new account along with the passbook and they would send a cheque.

I think they have done every thing possible to drag out the process of letting someone have their own money and all the while the cash was earning an uncompetitive rate of interest.

Seems like even small building societies have been tainted with greed bug that infests all of our banks.

Stay clear of this one.

Reaper

It does sound a bit over the top, and foolishly so if they wanted to retain him as a customer. However some of your points don't sound unreasonable. For example I don't know what FSA checks you expect to be carried out on an existing customer.

As to the ID they are very clear about it at outset on their web site:

The account will mature on the child's 18th birthday, at which point the account holder (the child) will be required to provide current full identification

MissConception

Reaper wrote: »

I don't know what FSA checks you expect to be carried out on an existing customer.

I didn't expect any for an existing customer but the very fact that they went ahead and opened a new account for 18 year old (without being asked to do so - nor without giving him the option of returning the money) they had to follow the FSA procedures. He just wanted the money back not a load of bureaucratic, time wasting and hassle.

And.....it's not as if we had our heads in the clouds.....we phoned them before the account transferred and were advised to "wait".

Why do we have such a closed market in banks and BS's - anyone know? What is stopping an American bank doing business in the UK and providing some real competition to the cartel we have?

Reaper

MissConception wrote: »

What is stopping an American bank doing business in the UK and providing some real competition to the cartel we have?

One US bank did start recently in London as has been well received - the Metro Bank.

However you should be careful what you wish for. US banks typically have a raft of charges even on current accounts (e.g. for direct debits and paying in a cheque) that UK customers are spared.

opinions4u

MissConception wrote: »

Why do we have such a closed market in banks and BS's - anyone know? What is stopping an American bank doing business in the UK and providing some real competition to the cartel we have?

Most American banks are completely stuffed after the Credit Crunch. Citibank have just offloaded Egg because they can't make money out of it due to competition in the marketplace. MBNA have put their credit card business up for sale.

What evidence do you have that there's a cartel operating in the UK?

There's a wide range of current account choice; savings rates vary significantly between providers and niche players such as Co-op, First Direct and Metro Bank focus on service as their main selling point.

Tesco and Sainsbury both have their own banking licences and offer competitive products. ING remain competitive in savings, mortgages and insurance and the likes of Yorkshire Bank a regional alternative to the big brands of HSBC, Barclays, RBS, Nat West, Halifax, Santander etc.

I don't see a cartel.

MissConception

opinions4u wrote: »

What evidence do you have that there's a cartel operating in the UK?

There's a wide range of current account choice; savings rates vary significantly between providers and niche players such as Co-op, First Direct and Metro Bank focus on service as their main selling point.

You make a very good point. There is clearly competition between banks for customers or at least for "good" customers.

However I think the bankers Clearing System is a barrier to entry for foreign banks. Also when customer centric improvements are proposed like intra-day clearing, the banks as a group fought it all the way and only after serious pressure from the Government did they concede a half-baked "faster" payments system.

Then there are their rules. It is hard to know for sure what comes from the banks and what from the FSA or how the banks have "co-operated" with the FSA in drafting those rules. Nevertheless they seem designed to generate much frustration for the customer whilst safeguarding the banks profits in the guise of safeguarding customers money. The anti-money laundering regs seem to me to be a blunt instrument. As a result it is harder to extract one's own money from a bank than it is to set-up a brand new account and deposit it in the first place.

If a half-decent bank set-up in the UK and provided good customer service that was significantly better than the current cartel (no apologies) I think they would have all the customers they could handle.

agrinnall

I don't see why the Clearing system would be a barrier to entry by foreign banks. You must agree that some sort of clearing mechanism is needed. Any bank that doesn't want to be a clearing bank can enter into an agency banking arrangement with one that is.

And Faster Payments isn't a half baked system per se, what is poor is that some organisations have refused to take part, some have awful implementations of it, and worst of all is the lack of action by government to enforce minimum standards. If everyone did what the 'good' banks have done then it would be a great system.

Thrugelmir

MissConception wrote: »

1. They should have contacted me with options not just effected the transfer.

2. They should have listened to what I wanted not just carried on in their own way.

3. They opened a new account improperly, without all the FSA checks being done.

4. They refused to transfer the money or even let him have a passbook until he proved who he was.

5. They were told that he simply wanted the money back but nevertheless completed the opening process and passbook issue.

6. They then insisted on needing a letter to close the new account along with the passbook and they would send a cheque.

Absolutely nothing wrong in what they did.

As son as your son was 18. The account became his, and his alone. So why should they give you the options.

Also the existing account was no longer suitable. So would automatically default to a new account. There's no requirement for FSA checks of any kind in doing so.

Maybe ask questions before posting assumptions.

MissConception

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Absolutely nothing wrong in what they did.

As son as your son was 18. The account became his, and his alone. So why should they give you the options.

Also the existing account was no longer suitable. So would automatically default to a new account. There's no requirement for FSA checks of any kind in doing so.

Maybe ask questions before posting assumptions.

I must disagree with you: there is plenty wrong with this otherwise I would not have bothered to post here.

The issue is around having the money returned to him on his 18th birthday or giving him the option of continuing to invest with Chorley - not forcing him to do so (at an unattractive rate) and then putting up barriers to withdrawal subsequently.

Having "opened" an new account the Chorley have insisted on the identification process (which I assumed was FSA rules but if not then what is their legal backing for such insistence?)

Incidentally, the saga continues. Having opened the account and sent the new passbook my son requested the closure of the account. The Chorley replied saying that the identification criteria have not been met and are once again asking for a document from a list of 4 items - none of which he possesses. And just for good measure they have sent another application from to complete (same as the one already completed and sent) - that is an Account Application form to close an account.:mad:

I would very much like to escalate this matter and seek compensation for lost interest and emotional upset. Can anyone advise the best way to go about this?

MissConception

agrinnall wrote: »

I don't see why the Clearing system would be a barrier to entry by foreign banks. You must agree that some sort of clearing mechanism is needed. Any bank that doesn't want to be a clearing bank can enter into an agency banking arrangement with one that is.

And Faster Payments isn't a half baked system per se, what is poor is that some organisations have refused to take part, some have awful implementations of it, and worst of all is the lack of action by government to enforce minimum standards. If everyone did what the 'good' banks have done then it would be a great system.

Agreed a clearing system is needed but not the one we have that is controlled by the banks. An independent system that worked in favour of the whole population and which the banks could not maniuplate.

Having to go through an agency would be allowing the miscreants to retain the keys to the jail.

gt94sss2

Reaper wrote: »

One US bank did start recently in London as has been well received - the Metro Bank.

Having lived in the USA, the banking system there is a lot worse that here. As you say, charges for many things we take for free (for instance).

However, Metro Bank in the UK is not associated with the bank of the same name in the US. One of the founders in the UK, did help found another bank in the US which shares many similarities (in approach) with them

MissConception wrote: »

The issue is around having the money returned to him on his 18th birthday or giving him the option of continuing to invest with Chorley - not forcing him to do so (at an unattractive rate) and then putting up barriers to withdrawal subsequently.

Most children's accounts will have something in their T&C that the account will automatically change/rollover to an 'adult' account at 18.

Regards
Sunil