Denied Packaged Account Reclaim (Natwest) is it worth FOS???

Nasqueron

dukesofkent wrote: »

I complained about a packaged account that i still hold (due to a large overdraft, which i have no way of paying off) and was given the same time limit reason, 2009 account review T&C's, you should have realised then etc. My reason for complaint was that i was "upgraded" to an Advantage Gold account as there were moving away from fee free accounts and this was the cheapest "fee" account they produced. How was i to realise earlier that i had been mis-sold through previous paperwork they've sent that just lists the so called "benefits" and didn't actually inform me that they had fee free accounts available. I also feel tied in due to the overdraft which by todays comparison has £150 extra 0% interest than there other accounts.
I'm going to take my complaint to the FOS

Taking it to the FOS will result in along wait before they come back to you and advise it was time barred.

If you were told of the costs and benefits in 2009 you had 3 years from then to complain it was miss-sold. As your post implies it was changed pre-2009 then the 6 year time bar will also be in place.

Do note also the bank can point out the extra OD 0% part (if you are using it) as evidence the account is worth something to you as well.

Maybe you will get lucky but don't hold out too much

cing0

Nasqueron wrote: »

Taking it to the FOS will result in along wait before they come back to you and advise it was time barred.

Not factually true.
Had a case converted recently with provisional assessment from adjudicator in 5 weeks after submitting the complaint form online.

Nasqueron

cing0 wrote: »

Not factually true.
Had a case converted recently with provisional assessment from adjudicator in 5 weeks after submitting the complaint form online.

Which bit of that has any relation to someone with a complaint that is timebarred?

5 weeks suggests an auto payout without investigation or the bank may appeal it putting the case in the ombudsman's queue

lee.cadman

I had a packaged account with RBS and they have replied that I'm out of time because it was back in 2005. I didn't know about this trick banks was using till a few weeks ago until I read an article on this website. I spoke to the bank and they came back with the timeframe argument but how am I out of time when I only realised how stupid I have been recently.

dunstonh

I didn't know about this trick banks was using till a few weeks ago until I read an article on this website.

Its not a trick. Its used in law in most areas.

but how am I out of time when I only realised how stupid I have been recently.

So, you were happy until someone told you not to be happy?

Mersey_2

Sadly it does sound as if you're out of time.


However, as my successful reclaim of NatWest Adv Gold Acc fees' (packaged acc) was similar, I thought best to let you and others know.


I was not informed by the NatWest employee who transferred myself to the Adv Gold Ac in 2007 that any monthly fees applied.


I was informed (also wrongly) that it was the only way to increase my overdraft.


As I am not a home owner and did not own a car at the time, I did not need or use the insurance products which the acc provided.


In 2012 I stated that I wished to move to a new fee free account; but, was informed - incorrectly - that I would have to repay my overdraft immediately if I did so.


Last year I complained (via email to [EMAIL="customer.relations@natwest.com"]customer.relations@natwest.com[/EMAIL]) and within weeks I received the 7 years' worth of monthly acc fees, together with 8% interest and a small amount of compensation due to the misinformation from staff.


So as a general rule it's certainly worth pursuing [even if not in the OP's case]. After all this is a site for claimants and appellants seeking redress from banks, bosses and retailers. So don't be put off even if some contributors on threads constantly tell people not to bother.

dunstonh

So as a general rule it's certainly worth pursuing [even if not in the OP's case]. After all this is a site for claimants and appellants seeking redress from banks, bosses and retailers. So don't be put off even if some contributors on threads constantly tell people not to bother.

There are no posters constantly telling people not to bother.

Mersey_2

Well actually you were the worst offender in that regard.


Apart from being somewhat cruel, given that this is a forum for claimants and appellants, it's somewhat bizarre.


No doubt if posters wanted to hear an opinion akin to the British Bankers' Association, they would ask for that.

Nasqueron

Mersey wrote: »

Well actually you were the worst offender in that regard.


Apart from being somewhat cruel, given that this is a forum for claimants and appellants, it's somewhat bizarre.


No doubt if posters wanted to hear an opinion akin to the British Bankers' Association, they would ask for that.

dunstonh's posts are blunt and factual, providing the "devil's advocate" position making people more aware of what they will realistically get back from the bank - too many people have seen the £££ and the CMC lies and believe that they can just send in a complaint saying they didn't know they had it or that they were forced to have it (or in some cases, contradicting themselves by claiming both) - if people took time to read his posts properly they could see areas where the complaint was weak and get a more realistic expectation of output.

dunstonh

Well actually you were the worst offender in that regard.

i tend to focus on the difficult/unusual cases which can often result in telling people things that they do not particularly want to hear. However, I have had plenty of occasions where I have told people to continue. Indeed, on one case that went to private messaging and more personalised help, I helped get back over £70,000 in redress.

I have also warned about plenty of scams in advance of them going bad. Arch Cru, Rockingham, Kerobo, Cartel to name a few.

Every complaint reason has different chances of a success. From the provable factual complaint reason that is a nailed on complaint success to the unprovable allegations that could just as easily be made up which rarely result on that point being classed as the uphold reason. Making people aware that their complaint is weak and putting them in an informed basis to improve it is a very strange thing for you say is wrong.

Also, I would take issue as I rarely tell anyone not to proceed. If you have any evidence to support your allegation that I am the one that says that the most then post it. Otherwise you should retract your statement as it is a lie.