Packaged Bank Accounts - Hop on the Bandwagon Folks

wotsthat

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/reclaim-packaged-bank-accounts?utm_source=MSE%2BNewsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=22-Jan-13&utm_campaign=reclaim

Millions pay a monthly fee for their bank account, often sold on the basis of ‘free insurance’. While it can be a great deal, even the regulator, the FSA, says huge numbers of these policies are “useless”. We believe thousands may have been mis-sold them.

If you’ve got, or had, a premier or packaged bank account in the last 10 years, if they overpromised, told you it was compulsory, or gave you insurance that didn’t cover you, you could be due £100s or even £1,000s back. This is a full step-by-step guide, including template letters, to reclaiming bank account fees.

I bought a Greggs meal deal at lunchtime but they also sold me a sausage & bean melt which I didn't really want and certainly didn't need.

Martin - please help.

kabayiri

Banks should just hand the money back and accept that they are useless at flogging these additions.

I bet they wished they had handed PPI money back, rather than allow a multitude of PPI firms to load typical 30% 'handling charges' on top.

Graham_Devon

Yer, probably worth just handing all the money back and be done with it.

wotsthat

BMW sold me a car fitted with cruise control - it came as part of the package - they didn't check to see if I wanted it or needed it.

Martin - please help.

grizzly1911

When did the punter stop being responsible for their own decisions?

If they have been stupid enough to take one of these accounts out more fool them. I am sure they haven't been water boarded until they did.

PPI I can understand as the loan - O/D maybe have seemed to be conditional on taking it out.

Surely if you have simply gone on holiday relying on the insurance, whether it would have paid out or not, means you have had some form of value out of it. Many stand alone policies don't always cover you anyway.

As these are often bundled with other "benefits" which you may or may not use who decides which bit of the package was erroneously sold? Who decideds how much that erroneously sold bit was worth/cost?

Are these covered by the normal 14 day cooling off period? If this grace period is being effectively ripped up just where do you stop. If I decide to only drive my car every other day can I claim a refund for the days I decided to not to use it?

Mallotum_X

numpties who claim under this clearly are not capable of making financial decisions and should just have their accounts closed.

wotsthat

kabayiri wrote: »

Banks should just hand the money back and accept that they are useless at flogging these additions.

It's a worry - if they stop fleecing stupid people who's going to fund free current accounts for the rest of us?

StevieJ

Am I too late to sign up for one of these accounts, I wouldn't wish to miss out on the Compo :eek:

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

BMW sold me a car fitted with cruise control - it came as part of the package - they didn't check to see if I wanted it or needed it.

Martin - please help.

But this isn't actually like buying a BMW with cruise control, and actually getting a BMW with cruise control. It's more like buying a BMW with cruise control, only to find you don't actually own the keys to use it.

This is about buying a product that you will never actually be able to use.

For example, travel insurance that won't cover your age, breakdown cover that didn't cover your car or mileage. Home insurance that only covered registered items, that no one told you or made you aware you had to actually register.

I remember that my dad took out credit card fraud cover for the household, that didn't cover for credit card fraud outside of the UK. So, in the one case we needed to use it, as the money had been taken in Germany, the cover was null and void, but now had a claim against it, which rendered the insurance null and void.

I know someone who had a laptop, which wasn't covered by the accidental insurance under her bank account package, as the item was was a portable item...and it so happened, indeed, so was every other electrical item as it could be moved.

Believe there was a problem with excess on a lot of these packages, rendering them totally pointless anyway to the consumer. Though this is based on heresay.

That is miss selling through and through. Hence why just giving the money back would probably be more beneficial to all.

Taking these accounts often got you preferential loan rates, and better services.

grizzly1911

Graham_Devon wrote: »

But this isn't actually like buying a BMW with cruise control, and actually getting a BMW with cruise control. It's more like buying a BMW with cruise control, only to find you don't actually own the keys to use it.

This is about buying a product that you will never actually be able to use.

For example, travel insurance that won't cover your age, breakdown cover that didn't cover your car or mileage. Home insurance that only covered registered items, that no one told you or made you aware you had to actually register.

I remember that my dad took out credit card fraud cover for the household, that didn't cover for credit card fraud outside of the UK. So, in the one case we needed to use it, as the money had been taken in Germany, the cover was null and void, but now had a claim against it, which rendered the insurance null and void.

I know someone who had a laptop, which wasn't covered by the accidental insurance under her bank account package, as the item was was a portable item...and it so happened, indeed, so was every other electrical item as it could be moved.

Believe there was a problem with excess on a lot of these packages, rendering them totally pointless anyway to the consumer. Though this is based on heresay.

That is miss selling through and through. Hence why just giving the money back would probably be more beneficial to all.

Taking these accounts often got you preferential loan rates, and better services.

Depends if they wqere sold and misrepresented. If the terms and condition were handed out and signed up to the punter would have had 14 days to consider if it met their needs. It wasn't compulsory, conditional or insinuated as such to take the product. No different to any other optional insurance package.

If it were a"premier" package offering you some enhanced service offering arguably the banks could say this is what you are paying for. The insurance was just a no cost give away.

Graham_Devon

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Depends if they wqere sold and misrepresented. If the terms and condition were handed out and signed up to the punter would have had 14 days to consider if it met their needs. It wasn't compulsory, conditional or insinuated as such to take the product. No different to any other optional insurance package.

If it were a"premier" package offering you some enhanced service offering arguably the banks could say this is what you are paying for. The insurance was just a no cost give away.

T&C's can't be used as a get out clause for selling a product you will never be able to use.

If the banks were going to argue anything, they would have already done so, but they have been prepared for this for a while. Someone high up in Barclays was stating they were aware of this miss selling and making provisions for it a few months back now.

They accepted it was sold en-masse to people it would never have suited. T&C's don't cover for that.

I agree that there will now be a bandwagon, and people who have used the products successfully will be all over this like a rash. However, that's no excuse to try and suggest this practice was OK.