Halifax lost my money

8elarus

Thanks all. I've left a message on their FB page and their social media team were straight on it. They asked me if I wanted to escalate my complaint, so I obviously said yes. Apparently I'll hear back from them within 5 working days. Still sending the letter tomorrow though. Refused to give them my contact number as want it all in writing. Watch this space. X

the_insider

That was silly. They would have called you tomorrow at the latest and at least got more info if they need it so they can do a full investigation. Now you'll have to wait for it all to go back and forth in writing for weeks rather than a quick call, getting it all sorted and then asking for confirmation in writing. They've probably got a number from your application or something anyway so they'll still call you.
Nose, face, cut, springs to mind.

pmduk

Short answer = next time pay any bill via your account.

JuicyJesus

pmduk wrote: »

Short answer = next time pay any bill via your account.

This also. Who pays their bills with cash in this day and age?

masonic

JuicyJesus wrote: »

This also. Who pays their bills with cash in this day and age?

Presumably, someone who has cash that they would otherwise have to deposit and then use to pay the bill. In the words of the OP...

8elarus wrote: »

Simply paid cash. Why? Because I didn't see the point in putting the earnings for the day in just to pay it all out straight away.

I can't see how this would be made any better by the OP having a stamped paying in slip and a missing deposit from their account rather than a stamped receipt for a bill that wasn't paid.

xylophone

It seems to me that a customer has a perfect right to expect that a payment made in cash should be processed as efficiently as a payment made in any other way.

And it is totally unacceptable for a manager to try to bully a customer into an admission of fault.

Zanderman

JuicyJesus wrote: »

This also. Who pays their bills with cash in this day and age?

Er... the OP. Obviously.

Just because it's not a 'modern' way of paying bills doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. It is a perfectly reasonable bill-paying option.

And since the facility exists to do this, it is reasonable to expect it to work.

There's no need (or point, in the context of this thread) to dismiss it as somehow old-fashioned!

Voyager2002

McKneff wrote: »

Personally, in ths day and age when payments can be made electronically, by card, by transfer, by any other electronic measn, why on earth would anyone pay cash.


I would pay cash if it was insisted on but I would not be accepting a receipt that was just stamped 'paid'
I would want a proper receipt, date, time, even down to a photo on me mobile, lol. Too many idiots and too many thieves about....

Oddly enough, I recently paid a bill at Halifax, by paying cash over the counter, and received exactly the kind of receipt that the OP describes. That is what banks have always done since I started using them in the 1970s, so I don't think there was anything unusual about this nor any reason to question it.

Since Halifax only offer a bill-paying service to their customers I needed to give details of an account I held with them: I did so by quoting details that the cashier found on her computer system, but I can easily understand that the OP might have provided identification by producing a card that was scanned.

I do usually pay bills electronically but had specific reasons for paying this in cash: these things are a normal part of life.

Voyager2002

the_insider wrote: »

That was silly. They would have called you tomorrow at the latest and at least got more info if they need it so they can do a full investigation. Now you'll have to wait for it all to go back and forth in writing for weeks rather than a quick call, getting it all sorted and then asking for confirmation in writing. They've probably got a number from your application or something anyway so they'll still call you.
Nose, face, cut, springs to mind.

Except that presumably the OP provided all the information that they needed to investigate, and needs a written record of anything that is promised. There are reasons why large organisations try to shift discussions to the telephone rather than in written form, and those reasons are in their interest rather than ours.

the_insider

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Except that presumably the OP provided all the information that they needed to investigate, and needs a written record of anything that is promised. There are reasons why large organisations try to shift discussions to the telephone rather than in written form, and those reasons are in their interest rather than ours.

Having worked in banking complaints for a number of years I can assure you that customers often think they've given all the information but they have simply ranted about one point and neglected to mention all the other relevant bits that will sway a decision one way or the other.
And no complaints handler would have any reason not to also send a letter confirming their decision. Refusing to speak to the bank just gets the advisor's back up!:o