Stung by halifax web saver reward scam. Advice?

pqrdef

jem16 wrote: »

Perhaps you would be best not using online applications and going into the branch where someone can guide you through it.

It was online applications only. Have you seen their branch accounts?

But I don't need help thanks, I've opened dozens of accounts online, with all the major banks and quite a few more. So far, banks have cocked up a lot more applications than I have.

jem16 wrote: »

Businesses can only do so much but they cannot force people to read applications and T&Cs properly.

Nobody else expects me to read T&Cs at all. I can remember when banks didn't either. When products were straightforward, it wasn't necessary. When did it become necessary to read a 40-page rule book to run a simple savings account?

I had a savings account at primary school. I put money in every Tuesday morning and drew it out when I wanted to spend it. They paid 2.5% interest. There were no rules about interest dropping to 0.1% if I made 2 withdrawals in any 3-month period. There were no minimum deposits or minimum balances or regular funding requirements. It just worked.

dunstonh

I can remember when banks didn't either. When products were straightforward, it wasn't necessary.

Most T&C exist because of complaints, law and FSA regulation. Products may once have been simpler but then consumers tended to take on personal responsibility as well .

Gromitt

pqrdef wrote: »

I had a savings account at primary school. I put money in every Tuesday morning and drew it out when I wanted to spend it. They paid 2.5% interest. There were no rules about interest dropping to 0.1% if I made 2 withdrawals in any 3-month period. There were no minimum deposits or minimum balances or regular funding requirements. It just worked.

So did I, the account paid a similar interest level. It just worked. However, for a few simple rules, you could get 5%.

Same goes here: customer had a 2.3% easy access account that "just worked", they decided to move it to a 2.8% account on the strength of an advertising banner, doing no research and not even reading the application form properly.

If they keep doing things on the strength of a single advertisement, then this isn't going to be the last time they get bitten.

Too many customer assume how things work, and then complain when it doesn't work how they expected it to.

In this case, the OP could of at least checked the interest before depositing the money, rather than assuming both themselves and the bank did everything to the OPs expectations.

pqrdef

opinions4u wrote: »

The answer to the bolded bit is "because the customer wanted an ATM card".

When I opened mine, if I'd wanted an ATM card, I'd have opened two accounts, one of each.

But if anybody opened the pathetic 0.25% account with the card, did anybody say "oh by the way, you might like to open this Reward account as well"? Cross-sellling opportunity missed there I think.

Most things I buy, the seller seems to want me to get the right thing and use it the best way. Nobody wants me to buy shoes the wrong size or use the wrong tool for the job. But so many bank products seem to be designed in the hope that the customer will buy the wrong thing or fail to find the best way of using it.

atush

It is quite clear to me (if not most others) that most of the screen shots posted here were AFTER the OP applied for the acct. And were changed (make larger, bolder, more obvious) due to the number of complaints received.

It is not clear that the Ombudsman made his decision on the old screenshots as they weren't supplied. yes there was small print.

So, no longer should there be accounts named the same or very similarly with the same account form. All accts should have different names and forms. Cards or not, the forms shoudl be different and so this could not happen.

Isn't beyond the banks to do this, it is a cost consideration as the bank money crunchers change things after accts are released to the public. So if they want to change, they should pay to change the forms and information. Everyone happy?

Anyway, as I said the OP has no recourse in law. But they might in the court of public opinion.

helifox

jem16 wrote: »

The FCA clearly state on their website that they don't handle individual complaints. It is likely that they would simply pass it the FOS where you have been.

If you are acting as POA it is even more important that you check and read all the T&C. The small triangular icon that you refer to was clearly marked to click for further account details. It would seem sensible to do this when setting up a new account and it wouldn't have involved much time to do so.

The Advertising Standards Authority recommended going to the FCA re: the misleading advertising. It is not really an individual complaint.

helifox

opinions4u wrote: »

Please an you explain how this process works.

Thanks.

I just called them. They gave me a complaint reference and an email to send the written complaint to.

pqrdef

Of course the other trick to get the best out of these 12 month bonus accounts is to get a new one every month or two, to keep rolling forward the end of the bonus period, so whenever they drop the rate for new customers you've got 10-12 months left to run. But the banks never tell you that either.

Can also help if you've got the wrong account.

Strange when firms undersell their products - make the deal better than it looks, but you have to figure it out.

helifox

Hominu wrote: »

So basically what happened is that you didn't read the application form carefully, you agreed to the terms and conditions without reading them, and now you are on here complaining that you got scammed by Halifax.

The 0.25% was in clear sight, not hidden in 0.2pt font and not even hidden in the depths of the T&Cs.

Therefore the loss of interest is completely your fault, no scam has occurred and you need to accept this and move on.

Err excuse me - in clear sight? What was in clear sight was a large banner proclaiming 2.8% for a Web Saver Reward account and instructions to click to apply for it. There was no indication of a rate drop on the application until after August 6th (we applied in April) and there was no email confirming what we had or hadn't applied for. What was in clear sight was a logo at the top of the application and on the banner saying 'Giving a little extra help'.
I am a newbie at this - but am beginning to suspect that Halifax pay people to write replies to these threads...some of the responses are so bizarre.

rb10

atush wrote: »

It is quite clear to me (if not most others) that most of the screen shots posted here were AFTER the OP applied for the acct. And were changed (make larger, bolder, more obvious) due to the number of complaints received.

Have you actually looked at the earlier screenshots?

Yes, they changed parts from time to time, but the thing you will notice is consistent throughout is the large bold text stating that you have to select the no card option.

In the screen shot posted earlier in the thread, the warning is no larger, bolder or more obvious than in previous versions of the page.