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

innovate

Caladan wrote: »

..... or only allow them to open a Basic Account (which should be sufficient anyway)....

You do come out with some unbelievable statements! Who are you to decide what "should be sufficient" for other people?

It appears you are not able to understand that [retail] banks would have no reason to exist if it wasn't for customers.

Before you talk "profitability" again: your argument that you can assess during an application process for a current account, without even looking at their credit file, whether a customer will be profitable or not is simply ridiculous.

But as has been mentioned before, luckily there are plenty of means of bypassing people with your quite outdated attitude. Not least going to one of those banks who now even have it in their T&Cs that customers can have 2, 3, 4 or more current accounts.

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

You do come out with some unbelievable statements! Who are you to decide what "should be sufficient" for other people?

It appears you are not able to understand that [retail] banks would have no reason to exist if it wasn't for customers.

Before you talk "profitability" again: your argument that you can assess during an application process for a current account, without even looking at their credit file, whether a customer will be profitable or not is simply ridiculous.

But as has been mentioned before, luckily there are plenty of means of bypassing people with your quite outdated attitude. Not least going to one of those banks who now even have it in their T&Cs that customers can have 2, 3, 4 or more current accounts.

Hmm, I think you're twisting my words somewhat, as you did previously when you suggested I said that HSBC would turn away a Mortgage just because the customer doesn't have a bank account (which is entirely untrue and NOT what I said). Whilst having an account run well is helpful to an application (the bank has your track record) it's certainly not a requirement.

And if I'm approached with a customer who tells me they want to open a secondary account to put a couple of direct debits through with a standing order transfer in once a month of, say, £300 to cover them then yes, I can tell if that customer is going to be profitable without running a credit search, I don't have to be an accountant to know that. Or is that ridiculous? I think not.

I also know if a customer is just looking to use the account for small things like on-line purchases or bills then a Basic account would be sufficient and as it brings less risk than a full account it's a win/win both ways.

As it happens I have a fair bit of experience and usually (emphasis on the usually I'm afraid) know what I'm talking about.

Or am I totally incorrect? Please convince me I'm wrong and I shall apologise for talking nonsense.

innovate

c'mon Caladan, you know as well as I do that people's needs and approaches do change over time.

To judge, by a personal opinion, the potential profitability at account application time is ridiculous.

I come and tell you I want to pay in my salary and pay my bills. I might even sign some forms that let you tell my employer to send my salary to HSBC, and to let you switch some DDs (if I have any). You let me sail through because you have now determined I will be profitable. I got my account, and a month later I change where my salary goes and how my DDs are paid. I can do all this without your help. And your profit opportunity goes south.

Conversely, I might just apply for now to have a second current account in reserve. I will pay a few quid in now and then by Faster Payment. You wouldn't "allow" me an account because you have decided I am unprofitable. So therefore, when I want a loan or a mortgage a couple of months down the line, I will give HSBC a wide berth because they have rubbed me up the wrong way. There goes a big profit opportunity for your company.

BTW, how do you deal with applications from people who have no salary? Will you automatically turn them down because they are not profitable, in your personal opinion?

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

c'mon Caladan, you know as well as I do that people's needs and approaches do change over time.

To judge, by a personal opinion, the potential profitability at account application time is ridiculous.

I come and tell you I want to pay in my salary and pay my bills. I might even sign some forms that let you tell my employer to send my salary to HSBC, and to let you switch some DDs (if I have any). You let me sail through because you have now determined I will be profitable. I got my account, and a month later I change where my salary goes and how my DDs are paid. I can do all this without your help. And your profit opportunity goes south.

Conversely, I might just apply for now to have a second current account in reserve. I will pay a few quid in now and then by Faster Payment. You wouldn't "allow" me an account because you have decided I am unprofitable. So therefore, when I want a loan or a mortgage a couple of months down the line, I will give HSBC a wide berth because they have rubbed me up the wrong way. There goes a big profit opportunity for your company.

BTW, how do you deal with applications from people who have no salary? Will you automatically turn them down because they are not profitable?

I'm playing devils advocate here, and I may have given the impression I'm far harsher than I am in reality. Your first example happens all the time - Nothing I can do about it and nor do I care that much about the bottom line, I've done my duty either way.

The second example - Well, the question is - Is there a valid reason to open this account? If the answers no then I'm encouraged to decline it, and I generally agree with that decision. Sometimes, like with a customer where I do feel there's future value there, I'm perfectly happy to open the account, it's all about the individual.

People with no salary generally don't pass the scoring process for a current account. As a rule I wont even apply for one if I know it will be turned down (to protect their credit rating from an unnecessary search, not because I'm lazy before you get the wrong idea). I'll offer them a Basic Account and if they're happy with it I'll open one up for them and give them a call in around 6 months to see how they're getting on with the job hunting.

Edit: The unnecessary search is also the reason I'll decline accounts without scoring them. No point leaving a mark on someones history when I know it's not going further. The credit search gives no indication of profitability whatsoever.

I treat poor customers exactly the same as I treat rich ones. The banks going to make a profit with or without me, but I still have an obligation to the company to do the right thing, if I wasn't willing to do that I shouldn't be working there.

Kind regards,
Cal

pmduk

Please tell us the organisation you work for, I don't want to consider ever banking with them.

Caladan

It's in plenty of previous posts

It may be best for me to retire from this forum now - I joined to give people an inside, unbiased perspective based on my own opinions, not get involved in arguments.

innovate

Caladan wrote: »

People with no salary generally don't pass the scoring process for a current account.

Dear oh dear. There are tens of millions of pensioners in the UK who by definition receive no salary. Chances are that most will pass scoring (but you said, in previous posts, you decide without scoring). I would be incensed if any bank offered me a basic account because I have no salary, and so would probably be tens of millions of pensioners.

Caladan wrote: »

I treat poor customers exactly the same as I treat rich ones.

well I hope so since it is none of your business whether someone is rich or poor when they apply for a current account. Rich people might have a terrible credit file, whilst poor people may have theirs in mint condition. Oh, I forgot, you said previously you don't even look at the credit files before you decide.

Anyway, you think you are doing the right thing, I think your comments on what you will "allow" people demonstrate an immensely outdated approach to dealing with customers. It's best if we agree to disagree to stop the noise on this thread.

innovate

pmduk wrote: »

Please tell us the organisation you work for, I don't want to consider ever banking with them.

It's HSBC. I don't think caladan ever told us but it is obvious from their posts.

Caladan

innovate wrote: »

Dear oh dear. There are tens of millions of pensioners in the UK who by definition receive no salary. Chances are that most will pass scoring (but you said, in previous posts, you decide without scoring). I would be incensed if any bank offered me a basic account because I have no salary, and so would probably be tens of millions of pensioners.

Again, you're jumping to conclusions. Of course I'm not going to tell a pensioner they can't have an account. I was making the assumption you were talking about unemployed people/people on benefits. Like I said before - It's all about the individual. You're making some very broad assumptions based on a few comments on a web forum.

innovate wrote: »

well I hope so since it is none of your business whether someone is rich or poor when they apply for a current account. Rich people might have a terrible credit file, whilst poor people may have theirs in mint condition. Oh, I forgot, you said previously you don't even look at the credit files before you decide.

And as I said in my previous post I do this only if I'm 100% sure the application wont go further - and I do it to protect the customer. I suppose I could run a load of unnecessary searches just to appease people (and I always offer to run the app, but I let the customer know it's unlikely to go through).

For the record - Staff have no access to the credit file - We get an accept or reject, that's it. Running a search gives me no more information on the customer than I had before I ran it. Your argument about running the search is therefore irrelevant.

innovate wrote: »

Anyway, you think you are doing the right thing, I think your comments on what you will "allow" people demonstrate an immensely outdated approach to dealing with customers. It's best if we agree to disagree to stop the noise on this thread.

I'm in my mid 20s, not that that's relevant to anything but it'd make it somewhat difficult to have an out-dated viewpoint. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something, and that's fine, but if you're going to quote me and make assumptions, please make it clear it's an assumption, I'm trying to help people and don't need to be trashed over a misunderstanding.

Kind regards,
Cal

jamesd

Caladan wrote: »

It may be best for me to retire from this forum now - I joined to give people an inside, unbiased perspective based on my own opinions, not get involved in arguments.

Please don't. You're making interesting points that people should find useful, even if sometimes the disagreement is of a nature that you'd prefer not to see. You have a secret weapon to deal with that: you are under no obligation to reply. It's an effective tool at times.

Innovate, you should expect all businesses to seek to have customers that they think will be profitable and to discourage those that they think won't be. Insurers do it with high charges or declining, banks by declining account or loans or whatever else. I do it with P2P lending, sometimes selling a loan piece shortly after it's been allocated to me if I don't like some aspect of the available circumstances of the borrower.

Caladan isn't an enemy here, rather a useful person who's telling us what really happens, to help us all to understand how things really work. Disagreeing with those things is fine, but the messenger doing their job as required by their employment isn't the problem. You and Caladan disagreeing isn't a problem either, but there should really be practical limits on how often the two of you go over the same ground, or it'll just get more frustrating for both of you.

Best thing to do is learn from Caladan and use that to help others to operate effectively according to the way the system works.