A crazy glitch at Natwest with cash deposit.

malchish

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

We do NOT have all the facts!


We do not know the balance of the account before the money was deposited?
We do not know if other payments were in the pipeline?
We do not know the balance after the credit card was paid?

1. The balance was +

2. There were no other payments, no direct debits, etc.
This is clear from the statement. If I did not describe other problem - it means there was no other problem, otherwise it would be relevant and i would have described it.

3. The balance stayed + after the credit card payment, of course - otherwise the cashier would not have processed the payment!

The statement shows a crazy issue: cash paid over the counter shows on the statement as next day!!!! (the comment line of the transaction showing the previous day as the payment date).
Instead of trying to nit-pick, just express how awful the mistake is, and how unfair is this on the customer!
Is this not enough to be startled by such a serious mistake, dear posted with 20000 posts (210 8hour working days spent on the forum - wow well done)?

colsten

malchish wrote: »

If you have nothing useful to say on the thread (and you do not it seems), just please refrain from posting.

I feel agrinnall has made a useful contribution.

malchish wrote: »

I post for consumers, and I help them, this is all right.

To just blindly side with consumers doesn't actually help the consumers. Think about it. Getting to the bottom of an issue, and operate with facts, is what helps consumers. You may or may not remember that it was me who posted the link to the relevant Natwest T&Cs for you, as one quite powerful fact your friend can use in their complaint.

malchish wrote: »

I know full well, that any OP that posts a real consumer problem, gets immediately flooded by posts by people who post full-time.

Rubbish. Lots of people get lots of help with real consumer problems, from me and agrinnall and all the other regular posters.

malchish wrote: »

You may be very genuine and very interested,but please try not to do this, it won't help anyone.

You know this isn't true. You even thanked me yourself, just a couple of hours ago, in this post:.

malchish wrote: »

This is and excellent find, thank you!
i did not manage to dig this out.

malchish

colsten wrote: »

If by that you mean we (the people on this forum) have all the facts, I need to disappoint you. What we have is what you reported has allegedly happened to another party (as an aside, why aren't they posting this themselves?). Even if we could verify this - which we cannot - we would never get to hear the Natwest version as Natwest would not comment on an individual case on the internet - and even if they did, we could not verify it.

As I said earlier, I am looking forward to hearing the outcome of the complaint.

Natwest has apologised already, and are investigating!!! This is their version! You guys ar alone in trying to discredit what I say. Natwest does not!
1) yes, you did post excellent excerpt from Nw website thank you!. I do appreciate this.
2) the people whom I help often do not ever post on forums.
3) we will hear the Natwest version at the outcome of the complaint, just wait.
4) if you doubt everything you see in this forum, how can you ever give a useful advice to anyone? Just post that you suspect they all lie.
5) My credibility has been proven on here after 900 people got refunds from one well-known company with my help. My posting history far exceeds yours, why doubt ? (but I work and do not sit on forum every day)?
6) If you understand how things work - hobody would dare to post false negative info about natwest, not to be sued. I only openly ost the facts, because they are true and precise.
Therefore you can trust, it is all true.

Tell me one thing: if what i described is true indeed - is not this an outrageous and stress-causing mistake? Just please answer and concentrate on this.
Let's consider OPs innocent until proven quilty.
Let's not accuse OPs of false info, unless you have any evidence to the contrary. Otherwise you may come across as an unpleasant, opinionated, aggressive person who seeks dispute.

malchish

I also ask colsten to not post rude words such as "rubbish" etc unless you want to be forever ignored as a local troll.
Rude words are against the rule. When one spends all days sitting on the forum (your first post was 04.08, straight away you started advising people - and made 693 posts in 27 days), this may be hard - however, claiming that other person;s word are rubbish is telling.
I ask you to wait for the outcome, before posting more antagonising comments on the thread.

colsten

I am getting bored now and I won't post any more until you post the resolution to the complaint.

Just one more point regarding facts.

malchish wrote: »

My posting history far exceeds yours, why doubt ? (but I work and do not sit on forum every day)?
.

You signed up in October 2010. I signed up in June 2014. You have 293 posts, I have 673. You have 95 thanks, I have 386. How does any of this mean that what either of us post can be verified by anyone else on the forum?

I resent your repeated snipes at me and others spending more time on the MSE forum than you do. Neither of us is more right than the other based on the amount of time spent on MSE but it is, frankly, none of your business how much time anyone spends anywhere, unless they intrude into your private space, A public forum is not anyone's private space.

matttye

malchish wrote: »

It is not hearsay - I saw all the receipts, slips, etc.
(unless you think everything on the forum is hearsay).
The last thing I would do is to post all the documents on a public forum just to satisfy your curiosity.

i did not ask for an answer, Natwest is already investigating. I posted for the others to be warned.

My bad, didn't realise you had seen documentary evidence. Your first post read like you had simply been told about what happened.

Luckily for him his diligence in obtaining all of the receipts etc. will help him immensely with his complaint, as if he hadn't obtained a printout showing that the balance was available then Natwest could just have quoted their 2:30 rule.

masonic

malchish wrote: »

I also ask colsten to not post rude words such as "rubbish" etc unless you want to be forever ignored as a local troll.
Rude words are against the rule.

Somebody had better give Martin a slap on the wrist then

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=intext:rubbish+site:www.moneysavingexpert.com
About 110 results (0.15 seconds)

jonesMUFCforever

Earmarked funds would not show on any statement. This might have made the available balance overdrawn.

matttye

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

Earmarked funds would not show on any statement. This might have made the available balance overdrawn.

I hope it's not as simple as that. I'm pretty sure almost everyone knows that your 'available balance' is what matters.

malchish

matttye wrote: »

My bad, didn't realise you had seen documentary evidence. Your first post read like you had simply been told about what happened.

Luckily for him his diligence in obtaining all of the receipts etc. will help him immensely with his complaint, as if he hadn't obtained a printout showing that the balance was available then Natwest could just have quoted their 2:30 rule.

Yes, luckily he not only took the receipt for each deposit, but went to ATM and took a mini-statement slip with available balance. After that problem surfaced, he, on advice, recorded another Natwest CS staff who confirmed to him that cash paid over the counter clears instantly.
The same has been confirmed with a Natwest rep on here.
This is why this case is so puzzling!
I believe, there may be a computer glitch in the software. Because, there is indeed some cut off time for cash paid into a machine in the bank - this is reasonable, because those machine are only emptied every so often. I think , the software might have confused those quick Deposit machine payments with any cash payments, and made a "delay"... however, on the day of transaction online account showed the deposits correctly, and no overdraft...