Nat West letter saying accounts are to be closed??

helentay_2

gb12345 wrote: »

Why "of course"? Is he not capable of acting in a mature and civilized manner? Sounds to me like he has anger issues.

What would you do if out of the blue five letters arrive two for his wife and three for him.
Four tell him and his wife that the bank are closing the personal current and reserve deposit accounts which are both in credit and have always been, and the fifth enclosing a 'Demand' to repay nearly £600 within 30 days as they have closed his business account as well.

I don't suppose that there would be too many that would want to sit round a table with a cup of tea with the bank manager and have a little chat about the problem. All of the letters are officious and demanding (all cheque books and cards to be returned as well as telling both his wife and him that they no longer will accept any firther deposits into any of the accounts).

I don't blame him at all for going in there 'all guns blazing'. I would do the same if my bank did that to me for no apparent reason other than 'a breakdown of communication'.

helentay_2

Sommer43 wrote: »

!!!!!!. I was just going to use that part of Helen's post...

Of course, it's perfectly natural to become "abusive and threatening" when faced with a difficult situation, isn't it? Coz that's what normal people do. I mean, where is the need for reasoned, calm, grounded and levelled behaviour? To simply ask;

"I've received this letter and would like to make an appointment with the business manager to find out the problem and why it affects my wife"

I mean, that's what I would do.

.

And I suppose the manager would say yes please come in and we will see what we can do for you????

They had already taken a course of action without any warning. I doubt very much that they would have been willing to negotiate a change to the already decided action.

When someone is upset, they get angry, when someone feels that they have been mistreated they get angry, when someone finds that someone has also taken their problem out on his wife and innocent party in all of this, they get angry.

I'm sorry but the time for having a cosy chat finished when they decided to issue those letters.

The one thing that I can't understand is why has his wife been dragged into all of this if it only involved my brother and his business account? What is the reason for closing a joint personal investment account?

Sommer43

helentay wrote: »

All of the letters are officious and demanding (all cheque books and cards to be returned as well as telling both his wife and him that they no longer will accept any firther deposits into any of the accounts).

Come on Helen, even you must see where I am going with this. It's okay for your brother to be demanding and abusive, but unreasonable for the bank to ask for their money back that has been borrowed repeatedly without asking permission?

They don't want him as a customer. Simple. They want his wife without him.

He has made no effort to rectify his unathourised borrowing. I jsut don't understand why you're not seeing this. He refuses to online bank because of the risks, he refuses to accept he is in the wrong. That's what happens, they close the account and demand payment. Your brother is a businessman, what does he do when a client doesn't pay? Am sure, given what you have written here he doesn't just shrug his shoulders.

gb12345

helentay wrote: »

What would you do if out of the blue five letters arrive two for his wife and three for him.
Four tell him and his wife that the bank are closing the personal current and reserve deposit accounts which are both in credit and have always been, and the fifth enclosing a 'Demand' to repay nearly £600 within 30 days as they have closed his business account as well.

I wouldn't be "threatening and abusive" as it would be obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense that that type of attitude wouldn't get them anywhere

helentay wrote: »

I don't blame him at all for going in there 'all guns blazing'. I would do the same if my bank did that to me for no apparent reason other than 'a breakdown of communication'.

Thugish behaviour obviously runs in the family doesn't it.

Sommer43

helentay wrote: »

And I suppose the manager would say yes please come in and we will see what we can do for you????

They had already taken a course of action without any warning. I doubt very much that they would have been willing to negotiate a change to the already decided action.

When someone is upset, they get angry, when someone feels that they have been mistreated they get angry, when someone finds that someone has also taken their problem out on his wife and innocent party in all of this, they get angry.

I'm sorry but the time for having a cosy chat finished when they decided to issue those letters.

No, the manager would likely say "We are not obliged to tell you, however, I will advise you of your rights and if you'd like to tell your wife to pop in, we can help sort new banking facilities for her" You've missed my whole point.

You are saying your brother has every right to demand and abuse a bank who no longer want to provide him with banking facilities and they have followed procedure and given him 30 days to repay in full? Because they have dared to ask for their money back, their money, not your brother's, he's able to "demand" and be "abusive?"

gb12345

helentay wrote: »

The one thing that I can't understand is why has his wife been dragged into all of this if it only involved my brother and his business account? What is the reason for closing a joint personal investment account?

Because the account is joint. They don't want anything to do with your brother as a customer, but are apparently happy to have her as a customer on a sole account basis.

gb12345

Sommer43 wrote: »

Your brother is a businessman, what does he do when a client doesn't pay? Am sure, given what you have written here he doesn't just shrug his shoulders.

Given what we've learned about him on this thread, my guess would be he would "send the boys round"

Sommer43

gb12345 wrote: »

Given what we've learned about him on this thread, my guess would be he would "send the boys round"

Yeah... To have a quiet word or go for a walk in the park...

meer53

Natwest don't want the OP's brother as a customer. End of. They're not suspicious of anything, they just don't like him, which from what i've read, is perfectly understandable. I've closed accounts when customers have been abusive, it happens at all banks. If a customer has a legitimate complaint, best to use the correct channels.

Best to move on really.

pmduk

helentay wrote: »

I don't blame him at all for going in there 'all guns blazing'. I would do the same if my bank did that to me for no apparent reason other than 'a breakdown of communication'.

The problem is, we're talking about a man who threatens a shopkeeper over 22p, yet feels it acceptable to borrow £578 of the bank's money with authority. I'm sorry but he sounds like a thug and a bully to me, but he's your brother, you wouldn't admit that, will you?

Sadly, I had to deal with people like him in my working career, the last one ended up several thousand pounds out of pocket and without insurance cover once the company listened to the abuse he felt it his right to give staff. (The recording of his final phone call was also passed to the police for them to consider whether to press charges under the legislation. I believe it was the telecommunications act.)