Nat West Time to Go - But Where?

AmIBeingRobbed

agrinnall wrote: »

Why not keep track of your spending and statements online?

That's no way to spend your day !! Better to keep your eye on your pension !!

One good thing about NatWest is it does pick up fraudulent spending within seconds, faster than I could on line. But then it disgraces itself by failing to pass on the info to the police. Fraudsters took a holiday on my cards - and someone collected goods more than a day after the incident was discovered. They could have and should have been nabbed - but the banks have an indefinite amount of time to inform the police and - the police will ignore whatever a customer tells them due to Banking Confidentiality. I did not have to meet the cost of the fraud, but everyone else did !!!!

AmIBeingRobbed

Saints2011 wrote: »

Im currently with Lloyds and have had no problems everything works as it should and statements are prompt.

That's interesting, you are the first person to recommend their own bank.

Of the big 5 (or is it 4?), I think Lloyds or HSBC are possibles. I am ruling out NatWest and Barclays.

I can't help noticing since RBS took over NatWest, the branches look a bit tacky. Poor decoration, dirty carpet etc. I think the staff have now gone a bit tacky too. I find my local branch especially unhelpful over handling affairs with other branches or other parts of Nat West.

AmIBeingRobbed

1. I've just paid three bills in one minute from my seat.
2. I see no evidence at all that for online banking the onus is on the customer, any more than you can prove that a letter with a cheque 'stuffed in it' was picked up, sorted and delivered.
3. I am presuming that you also don't trust direct debits, as setting one up for the minimum and then paying any way you like for any extra you may care to supplement the minimum with is a sure fire way to NEVER worrying about being late for payments.

1. Most of the time we never pay bills on line, they are all on direct debit. The amount paid off a credit card is highly variable and depends on a lot of factors so it is not well suited to Direct Debit, so I tend to pay it by post. I am not keen on using OnLine Banking, although I have used it very occasionally.
2. I think the Royal Mail is generally pretty reliable on delivery times. But it is clear either Nat West uses an un reliable courier - or it gives the courier mail late. There are no finger prints to suggest which - but whatever the case I still hold Nat West responsible for the late delivery of its statements, it can blame whoever it likes but it won't impress me ....
3. I tend to pay more than the minimum, so if I go Direct Debit, I could end up paying twice and doubling the bank charges. As I see it, I would pay the minimum on direct debit and then a second payemnt to top it up...

redpete

Why are you restricting your search to CCs that have a linked back account (and what do you mean by linked)? With Faster Payments there is no advantage that I can see (but willing to hear if I've missed something).

Looks to me like you have decided that the convenience of managing a CC online is not worth the perceived additional risk of fraud but are complaining about that lack of convenience - I suggest the answer is in your own hands.

Cell

AmIBeingRobbed wrote: »

1. Most of the time we never pay bills on line, they are all on direct debit. The amount paid off a credit card is highly variable and depends on a lot of factors so it is not well suited to Direct Debit, so I tend to pay it by post. I am not keen on using OnLine Banking, although I have used it very occasionally.

Then unfortunately you are limiting your options voluntarily. There is no magic wand if you're not prepared to use the facilities that millions of people use without any problems. And your own initial post demonstrates the voluntary problems that you ARE exposing yourself to.

2. I think the Royal Mail is generally pretty reliable on delivery times. But it is clear either Nat West uses an un reliable courier - or it gives the courier mail late. There are no finger prints to suggest which - but whatever the case I still hold Nat West responsible for the late delivery of its statements, it can blame whoever it likes but it won't impress me ....

Courier? I suspect it simply goes through the normal post?

I am forced to received postal statements from Mint (coincidentally part of the RBS Group) because I've closed the account down because of interest rate increases, and I seem to receive them about a week after the 'statement date'. They are delivered by the postman, not a courier or DX, or anyone else.

3. I tend to pay more than the minimum, so if I go Direct Debit, I could end up paying twice and doubling the bank charges. As I see it, I would pay the minimum on direct debit and then a second payemnt to top it up...

Bank charges? You'd have to explain more, because unless it's a business account Nat West don't charge for individual cheques or payments so long as you are in credit or within an agreed overdraft limit. I should know!!!

Not meaning to be harsh, but there are good answers here, just not the answers you apparently hoped for.

AmIBeingRobbed

Cell wrote: »

Courier? I suspect it simply goes through the normal post?

This mail carries no post marks whatsoever. I think the correspondence is taken by a courier from Nat West then passed to the Royal Mail for final delivery to the letterbox.

There are other possibilities - Nat West systems are running behind time, so the statements are printed late - or put into envelopes late.

Whatever the explanation, I think it is pretty poor to be receiving statements 11-13 days after the statement period ends.

Cell

Agreed, but the bottom line is that there is a simple solution which the vast majority of us use without problems. You choose not to and it's causing you inconvenience.

Still confused about the charges bit though...

AmIBeingRobbed

Cell wrote: »

I seem to receive them about a week after the 'statement date'.

That is not too bad. When it is taking nearly two weeks, it is pretty poor. What I don't like about it it is it reduces payment window from 2-3 weeks to about one week.

That is bound to increase the number of late payments.

Saints2011

AmIBeingRobbed wrote: »

That's interesting, you are the first person to recommend their own bank.

Cant complain yet..

meer53

AmIBeingRobbed wrote: »

That is not my experience. I know one person who lost a Barclays Credit Card on the way to the US. They picked up the tab for £3K spent on the card on the first day nof loss.

For credit card fraud, you aren't held liable as it's not your money which is stolen, it's the card issuers. If this person has been held fully liable for 3k i recommend they lodge a complaint with Barclaycard.

Different scenario if it was a debit card. You can be held fully liable if the card issuer claims you have been negligent and the funds were all credit funds (ie, not overdraft funds) Card issuers usually claim negligence if the PIN was with the card.