First Direct quick Q

toozie_2

Hi

I was a customer of First Direct soon after it opened, I think very early '90's for about a year, then closed the account-I just thought at the time I wanted a secondary account-but realised soon that I didn't.
The account was in my sole name -same name as now, and at the same address, but about 22 years ago.

Does anyone know if they would check their records to the start of their existence in 1989?

I want to transfer my account, and get the £100! I have an account in my sole name somewhere else, but we also have a joint account in a different bank again.
I don't suppose it would make it any difference if it was a joint account transferred, as my name would still be on it?

Thank you, for any help :beer:

CKhalvashi

They may do, they may not. HSBC didn't have paperwork from 2003 that our solicitor needed (we found it eventually), but it will probably be on a case by case basis.

Try it and see.

CK

rb10

Based on others' experiences, they will most likely still have you on your system.

You can get £100 by switching to Halifax.

takewhatyoucan

Both my partner and I had FD savings accounts around 2008, which were closed a year or so later. Recently switched our joint current account to FD, having forgotten we were existing customers. FD reminded us during the application but said they'd still pay the switching bonus, and were true their word.

meer53

You can't switch a joint account into a sole account.

toozie_2

meer53 wrote: »

You can't switch a joint account into a sole account.

Sorry may not have described what I want to do properly!
Switch my sole account to 1st Direct-in my sole name
or switch our joint account to joint account at 1st Direct.

I was the person who had an account in my sole name in the early '90's.

Thank you for your replies, may try and see.

YorkshireBoy

toozie wrote: »

Switch my sole account to 1st Direct-in my sole name
or switch our joint account to joint account at 1st Direct.


may try and see.

You emphasised your key objective in your OP, namely "and get the £100". I don't think either of the above will get you the £100, so you'd be wasting your time.


How about your partner opening a sole account, switching one of their sole accounts, and then adding you as a joint account holder once they've received their £100?

gozaimasu

You should apply and get accepted.

If you don't, then consider reporting them to the Information Commissioner for breaching the Data Protection Act for storing your information when it is not necessary to do so, and also for holding onto it for an unreasonable length of time.

toozie_2

gozaimasu wrote: »

You should apply and get accepted.

If you don't, then consider reporting them to the Information Commissioner for breaching the Data Protection Act for storing your information when it is not necessary to do so, and also for holding onto it for an unreasonable length of time.

:rotfl::rotfl:

rb10

gozaimasu wrote: »

You should apply and get accepted.

If you don't, then consider reporting them to the Information Commissioner for breaching the Data Protection Act for storing your information when it is not necessary to do so, and also for holding onto it for an unreasonable length of time.

Under the conditions of the £100 offer, the original poster is not eligible, as they have held a First Direct account in the past.

So First Direct do have a valid reason to retain basic data about their customers - determining their eligibility for this offer.

gozaimasu

rb10 wrote: »

Under the conditions of the £100 offer, the original poster is not eligible, as they have held a First Direct account in the past.

So First Direct do have a valid reason to retain basic data about their customers - determining their eligibility for this offer.

How far ahead do FD plan their offers?! If a customer closed their account 10 years ago, there is no way that FD would know 10 years down the line that they may offer an account with an incentive that had a T&C so that they had to hold onto customers' data forever.

I would argue that forever is most definitely an unacceptable amount of time to hold onto anyone's data. The decision lies with the ICO to make about whether or not that is the case. The more people that challenge this kind of thing, the more accepted it will be for people to ask questions about their data without meeting hostility.