We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
How much compensation could I be entitled to for Bank Error?
Comments
-
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?
Simple answer - no. But seriously, I doubt you are in any position to assess whether someone could make such a decision based on an application for a current account.
With your decision to turn down a customer's application for a current account, without even running a credit check, (as you said you would do), you have no "second opinion" on what the customer tells you. They may be brilliant revenue potential, but you may well have lost that customer's business forever by applying your personal judgement. Not just the current account but the entire financial dealings of that particular customer for life.
As to you caring for the customer: you have made several posts now that suggest you don't really. So may be you aren't.0 -
Simple answer - no. But seriously, I doubt you are in any position to assess whether someone could make such a decision based on an application for a current account.
With your decision to turn down a customer's application for a current account, without even running a credit check, (as you said you would do), you have no "second opinion" on what the customer tells you. They may be brilliant revenue potential, but you may well have lost that customer's business forever by applying your personal judgement. Not just the current account but the entire financial dealings of that particular customer for life.
As to you caring for the customer: you have made several posts now that suggest you don't really. So may be you aren't.
Unfortunately (and I make exceptions to this rule quite often) generally speaking if a customer does not bring the profit across within 3 months they never will. The 1 in 10 that actually does doesn't outweigh the cost of the 9 that don't.
It's better to lose the potential profitable customer than support a dozen unprofitable customers on the off-chance they'll actually bring their main banking over. I know it sounds brutal, but even if that one customer can make the bank a fortune (think Richard Branson, who was turned down by most major banks), the potential for profit is too low to justify spending the money.
I will add innovate, that I do my best for my customers regardless of what the bank wants, but I feel it's important to put the banks point of view fowards (indeed, I've helped customers raise a deposit with the banks money to pay for a new property even when the bank was repossessing, and I've done that because I felt it was right even though it just increases the banks risk).0 -
Bank employees who want to restrict accounts to those who will bank entirely with one institution have a large role to play in the perceived lack of competition in the current account market.0
-
-
Bank employees who want to restrict accounts to those who will bank entirely with one institution have a large role to play in the perceived lack of competition in the current account market.
Very true, and it's a big problem in the industry, unlike other retailers banks have a product that is essential for most people, and because of credit ratings those people can be restricted in their choice of where to give their business. Therefore the banks put their conditions on it as they see fit.
I do think the current account industry has a reasonable amount of choice and competition though (assuming your credit rating is ok). I get flamed a lot on this board but I'm open to arguments
0 -
Additional current accounts tend to be easy to get for those with good credit, with a few exceptions. Similar for credit cards. At the moment I have current accounts with three institutions and credit cards with five. Takes a little time but it's worth it for the reduced chance of being adversely affected when something goes wrong.As some have suggested, maybe I should open another account with another bank which would have made this situation easier to deal with.
A good reason for a bank, but not for a customer. Consider just a few situations: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.
1. Potty74's experience.
2. The NatWest/RBS/Bank of Ireland issues.
3. Issues with FD/HSBC or other security software or teams that can temporarily or permanently result in features being unavailable, even for customers acting completely lawfully and within account terms and conditions.
Might be nice if it wasn't so but there's a balance of interests and risks here and the customer end doesn't favour customers having only one current account. There are just too many known ways that things can temporarily go wrong for it to be sensible.0 -
This misconception will be very much kept alive when that new switcher service goes live in September - - they even automatically close your old account. So people with a low level of initiative will continue to think one current account is all they can have.
.
There is a real good reason for the closing of the old account. It allows any debits/credits processed to the old account to now be transferred to the new account.
Which is something that cannot be done now, when a account is left open.
This does cause many complaints from people who forget to tell companies they have moved banks and then find they have charges for exceeding limits etc.
As they have not been checking the old account.
Of course people will still have the option of not using the new service. Just as many of us do now.Never ASSUME anything its makes a>>> A55 of U & ME <<<0 -
other security software or teams that can temporarily or permanently result in features being unavailable, even for customers acting completely lawfully and within account terms and conditions.
Just as it is in the T/C that banks have to have security systems in place as well as abiding by current FSA/Government legal regulations.
If it is believed a customer is acting outside these then the bank has a duty of care to act on them. Which will result in a account lock down until it is proved one way or another.Might be nice if it wasn't so but there's a balance of interests and risks here and the customer end doesn't favour customers having only one current account. There are just too many known ways that things can temporarily go wrong for it to be sensible.
Its crazy to only have one account and after the number of system issues seen by several banks. I simply cannot understand why many of the people who use these banks and complained about it. Are still ONLY banking with them and have not opened a back up account.Never ASSUME anything its makes a>>> A55 of U & ME <<<0 -
dalesrider wrote: »I simply cannot understand why many of the people who use these banks and complained about it. Are still ONLY banking with them and have not opened a back up account.
It's because people like caladon see fit to deny them the opportunity.0 -
It's because people like caladon see fit to deny them the opportunity.
I'll decline them if there's nothing in it for the company (and why shouldn't I?), or only allow them to open a Basic Account (which should be sufficient anyway) doesn't mean they can't go elsewhere (most banks do actually allow split banking to a higher extent than mine).
And for the record, I've got 2 bank accounts
"A good reason for a bank, but not for a customer. Consider just a few situations:
1. Potty74's experience.
2. The NatWest/RBS/Bank of Ireland issues.
3. Issues with FD/HSBC or other security software or teams that can temporarily or permanently result in features being unavailable, even for customers acting completely lawfully and within account terms and conditions.
Might be nice if it wasn't so but there's a balance of interests and risks here and the customer end doesn't favour customers having only one current account. There are just too many known ways that things can temporarily go wrong for it to be sensible."
Agreed, although I find a credit card is usually sufficient to overcome temporary issues.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards