Stung by halifax web saver reward scam. Advice?

Archi_Bald

talexuser wrote: »

but I would not spend a lot of money making the claim since the chances of success are pretty low.

Agree with you there. Any in-depth investigation will with almost guaranteed certainty conclude that it was an unfortunate mistake by the OP, but a mistake they made and no-one else.

Emotional outbreaks such as accusing Halifax of scamming, renaming the account to "Xtra Rip-off", complaining about Halifax slogans 'Giving a little extra help', and excuses such as "I have been in a hurry", "Mum liked the idea of a card" do not help the OP's case in the slightest. If all this emotion would have been left out, and a factual complaint would have been raised with the CEO before the issue was taken to the FOS, the OP might have stood a chance for a goodwill payment from Halifax. But they didn't, and the FOS ruling now stands in their way as well.

As I posted yesterday, if the OP does seriously want to consider Court action, they should be consulting with a good Solicitor first. It might save them a lot of money and heartache.

Going to a paper might hold slightly better prospects, though I would have thought that any financial journalist worth their mettle would advise the OP to let it rest.

dunstonh

Going to a paper might hold slightly better prospects, though I would have thought that any financial journalist worth their mettle would advise the OP to let it rest.

Sometimes the media go with no-hope stories which are clearly the fault of the individual. I guess it depends on what other stories they have to run. Sometimes the provider will cave just to get rid of the case. Therefore rewarding the person that makes the error rather than educating them learning from their mistake.

Out of interest helifox, was the card ever used? - it could have an impact on any future decision.

Archi_Bald

dunstonh wrote: »

Out of interest helifox, was the card ever used? - it could have an impact on any future decision.

Here's your answer:

helifox wrote: »

We never used the card, nor withdrew any money. We didn't need one - but my Mum liked the idea of it...even though she couldn't leave the house to use it. the card was thus always purely ornamental.

BlindLeadingTheBlind

Archi_Bald wrote: »

It is not clear that they didn't.

But in any case, the account shows/showed online, complete with the interest rate applicable.

Hmmmm I think it could be important as it seems the confirmation letter has acted as a prompt in other cases (previous referenced journalist article and previous thread on here about the same time as the OP opened the account) for the "confused" customer to contact Halifax to confirm what account had indeed been opened and what interest rate applied. I'm thinking that if the banks procedures had not been followed in this respect with the OP then that could possibly give another avenue down which to approach the FOS. A ruling is more likely to go in the customer's favour if procedures have not been followed than the argument presented in the original complaint.

If this route is appropriate then I would still first try to resolve the issue through Halifax to give them a chance to introduce a bit of good old customer service to the handling of the complaint.

Archi_Bald

BlindLeadingTheBlind wrote: »

Hmmmm I think it could be important as it seems the confirmation letter has acted as a prompt in other cases (previous referenced journalist article and previous thread on here about the same time as the OP opened the account)

I think it could be word against word - - Halifax saying they sent a letter, the OP saying they didn't receive it. And noeither of them could ever prove they are right.

However, what can be proven is that the interest shows on the online banking, available 24x7, 365 days a year.

BlindLeadingTheBlind wrote: »

If this route is appropriate then I would still first try to resolve the issue through Halifax to give them a chance to introduce a bit of good old customer service to the handling of the complaint.

From what the OP said, Halifax don't want to talk to them any longer about the matter. So I think they have burnt their bridges for a compassionate settlement. Even if the complaint went to the CEO office now, there is a record on file, and the CEO would probably be delighted for the customer to leave "in disgust".

pqrdef

JuicyJesus wrote: »

I love how when banks make certain information clear as crystal but someone doesn't bother to read it and loses out as a result, the reply comes back "well they should have made it clearer!!!!!"

Now you're getting it. A valid contract depends on a meeting of minds (not on a signature on a dotted line, contrary to popular belief). The parties have to understand what they're agreeing on. The paperwork is evidence of the mutual understanding, if there is one, but it may be ambiguous evidence.

That makes it the bank's responsbility to make sure that it knows what account the customer intends to apply for, beyond the possibility of a mere mistake.

"If the customer's made a mistake, that's his problem" just doesn't cut it. They'll have to say that the customer wanted the 0.25% account, or at least that they had sufficient evidence to think so.

Trouble is, the customer doesn't know the whole product range. They're on thin ice as soon as they present the customer with a form which they might interpret as an application for a product that the customer isn't even aware of the existence of, because there's an obvious risk that the customer might not get the significance of the questions.

It's like asking somebody "What's your favourite colour?" without explaining what the consequences will be if he gives the wrong answer. And then saying "Didn't you see the notice?" Not good enough - you need to know that the customer has seen and read and understood the notice.

pqrdef

Nick_C wrote: »

I was surprised to see that you handle your mum's affairs as she has dementia, but nevertheless you asked for a cashcard because "she liked the idea".

And your problem with that is?

Archi_Bald

pqrdef wrote: »

A valid contract depends on a meeting of minds (not on a signature on a dotted line, contrary to popular belief).

Does it work like that then?

helifox

dunstonh wrote: »

Out of interest helifox, was the card ever used? - it could have an impact on any future decision.

It was never used.
And going through my files I can't find a confirmation letter, and don't remember receiving one - although we received the card...

I did get another letter from the Halifax on 25th April 2011, which I filed, saying that because we had a current account and a savings account we would be earning an extra .2%.

I guess if I DSAR them I will receive any confirmation letter, if one was sent. And if it is not among the papers, then we didn't get one.

Hominu

helifox wrote: »

...More confusion. It was because we applied for an ATM card, that we didn't meet the conditions. And we have one - with Web Saver on it.

So whats the problem?

You asked for an ATM card and so didn't meet the conditions for the 2.8% account, so were given a variable web saver. You have an ATM card with Web saver on it. Where's the confusion?

helifox wrote: »

I didn't think I was. And it wasn't published either on the ad. or the application form. 2.8% was.

Your saying that on the application form that you filled in, 2.8% was mentioned but not 0.25% ?

Or are you saying that the advertising banner advertised 2.8% and then directed you to a application form that didn't show any interest rates whatsoever ?

Big difference.