How much compensation could I be entitled to for Bank Error?

innovate

Potty74 wrote: »

I am not going to close all my accounts but I will be opening an account with another high street bank.

Very sensible thing to do. Pick on of the interest-paying ones, then you can effectively use the account as an instant access savings account with a Debit Card.

Still amazed how you were able to avoid the meltdown - but as your more recent experience demonstrates, things can go wrong out of the blue for anyone.

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

You what ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

It's not your decision.

But there you have your example, opinions4u,

I know there are several posts quoting mine, but I'll respond here.

It IS my decision, if I'm opening an account for someone and I feel it isn't appropriate It's perfectly acceptable for me to decline it without even running a credit search, this is a business remember.

The point is, if something wont draw in any income for the bank, why should I open the account?

I tend to be on the customers side when it comes to problems (hence putting myself out there on this forum) but there is definitely a balance there. A bank is required to offer a Basic account if you have no alternative, but beyond that it can choose its clients as it pleases.

Money-Saving-King,
Indeed, but you're playing the system, apart from your main bank you're probably costing the rest money. That's fine, don't get me wrong, but it's a good reason to demand primary banking surely.

Caladan

pmduk wrote: »

And how precisely do you stop it? Anyone who mandates their salary before the account is up and running properly is asking for trouble.

Can't enforce it, but you can ask for it.

innovate

Caladan wrote: »

Can't enforce it, but you can ask for it.

Luckily, these days we have the Internet to apply for current accounts, so we can avoid intimidating questions and "advisors".

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

Luckily, these days we have the Internet to apply for current accounts, so we can avoid intimidating questions and "advisors".

Very true, and the customer wins (which again, I don't really care about, I like to see a consumer victory) but my job is to build mutually profitable relationships with customers. To that end - It's easy to get a current account, but your Mortgage is more likely to be approved if you have a branch member supporting the application.

I enjoy arguing for both sides of a coin, and usually I'm on the customers side, but sometimes I agree with the rules and will defend them.

Edit: It's important to note if a staff member approves your application he/she is putting his/her name to it, if it turns out to be fraudulent they get shot out of a cannon (and there's no safety net). Online and telephone apps are fine, but they are far more risky. Convenience vs. being prudent.

innovate

Caladan wrote: »

It IS my decision, if I'm opening an account for someone and I feel it isn't appropriate It's perfectly acceptable for me to decline it without even running a credit search, this is a business remember

Like it or not, it is not your decision whether anyone opens another current account. Whether someone can get a current account does not depend on whether you "feel it appropriate".

You might feel very important because you can turn away a potential customer but any potential customer has lots of other choices.

I doubt very much that anyone who doesn't even run a credit search could possibly make an informed decision on whether a potential customer would be profitable or otherwise for the bank.

You do sound like you should have been a bank manager back in the times when bank managers terrorised the general public by making it seem they had all the powers.

Sad thing is, you have probably scared off some totally innocent people with your attitude. Hopefully they will eventually find their way on here to learn they don't need to be scared of some over-enthusiastic bank employee.

innovate

Caladan wrote: »

To that end - It's easy to get a current account, but your Mortgage is more likely to be approved if you have a branch member supporting the application.

It's a bit like Waitrose saying they won't sell me sausages unless I buy all my milk and chocolates from them. Just they wouldn't ever say that because they know consumers have choices, and you don't get customers to do business with you if you force their arm.

Thank you very much, though, for providing such interesting insight into how you like to do business. I am sure the Regulator will take a keen interest in any bank that would decline a mortgage because the customer doesn't have a current account with the mortgage provider. Of course banks/BSs could try all sorts of shenanigans to cover up any such policies but the nice thing is that there will always be whistleblowers so eventually the truth will come out.

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

Like it or not, it is not your decision whether anyone opens another current account. Whether someone can get a current account does not depend on whether you "feel it appropriate".

You might feel very important because you can turn away a potential customer but any potential customer has lots of other choices.

I doubt very much that anyone who doesn't even run a credit search could possibly make an informed decision on whether a potential customer would be profitable or otherwise for the bank.

You do sound like you should have been a bank manager back in the times when bank managers terrorised the general public by making it seem they had all the powers.

Sad thing is, you have probably scared off some totally innocent people with your attitude. Hopefully they will eventually find their way on here to learn they don't need to be scared of some over-enthusiastic bank employee.

I appreciate your post, and don't entirely disagree with it. Nevertheless, if I'm presented with a customer who wants to open an account just to pay their household bills, or use our coin paying in machine, there's no reason for me to not decline the application. A bills account can easily be opened with your existing bank and an account just to take advantage of a free machine is a joke.

I don't feel important, indeed I'm very low down the food chain, and you're quite right that someone can just go on-line, do an application and override my decision, but that's not my problem, I've done my job by declining it in the first place knowing it's no benefit to the bank, if the Direct team accept it there's nothing I can do about it, or would want to (because I don't really care what people do, as long as I've done my duty).

I would argue with your comment about making a decision without running a credit search though. If a potential customer tells me they're just going to use the account for a few Direct Debits or to keep some money on the side I know full well it has no benefit to the bank, and it'd be daft to open the account because it'll just cost money.

For the record, I'm almost always on the customers side, and I've pushed rules right to the edge of what's acceptable to help my customers. I play devils advocate here because it's important to get both sides of an argument.

I'll ask a simple question to end this - Should a business take on a client that will cost them money and bring nothing to the company?

innovate

Caladan wrote: »

Online and telephone apps are fine, but they are far more risky.

More risky for whom? And why?

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

More risky for whom? And why?

For the bank and the country, Anti Money laundering questions are filled in on a form rather than answered with real questioning, and I often see deception in customers when I'm talking to them (from experience). Most people are perfectly legit, but some aren't, and only human questioning can see the difference sometimes. The problem is, criminals make life more difficult for everyone else and it's unfair on the legitimate clients, but it has to be done.