Potential AMEX & VISA Card Misselling - Partially/Completely Hidden Annual Fee?

bigadaj

schnide wrote: »

Is that a qualified legal opinion or just your own opinion? I ask because I'm under the impression you can't just hide £140 in small print T&Cs that clearly the majority of people will not read in detail, especially when said major company was more than happy to promote the benefits and have me follow an application process giving extensive and full personal information before any chance whatsoever to do so.

What I want to happen is for this company to stop tricking customers either overtly or by accident. And so if anyone has some insight into their obligations and whether they've been fulfilled or not, I'd really be grateful to hear it.

A qualified legal opinion will cost you a fair bit more than £140.

At the end of the day you've not lost anything just used up a credit search which is of limited impact for most people.

If what you are stating is factual then there is absolutely no reason why you can't name and shame, report them to the Asa if necessary but this isn't really of help to anyone if you won't identify the company you're referring to.

FireWyrm

schnide wrote: »

Please note that I was emailed an offer which made no mention of any fees whatsoever, and did not see a public facing website before being taken straight to the application process.

So information on any company's website you might find is somewhat besides the point!

I can almost guarantee that you will have been asked to tick a box indicating that you had read and understood the full terms and conditions of the contract you were entering into. You are required to read this information before indicating your acceptance of the terms.

JimmyTheWig

There are two parts to this.

1. You have been mis-lead.
If you can get the company / the ombudsman / a court to agree this then you are entitled to cancel the contract - i.e. you give back the cards and they don't charge you for them.
It sounds like this has already happened, so nothing more to pursue here.
If you play it nicely you may be able to get a small goodwill gesture out of them, but as you are no longer their customer they may not want to show much goodwill as they don't have a customer relationship to maintain. Up to you if you want to try, though. Definitely not worth taking as far as the ombudsman or court, though.

2. You want to stop other people from being mis-lead.
Good for you.
As has been said, it sounds like it is the advertising that was misleading, so complain to the ASA.
Note that this won't get you anything personally, other than a warm fuzzy feeling that you've done the right thing.
If you are the only person to complain to the ASA about it then they may not do anything. They may have more pressing matters to deal with. But if others have already complained then yours might be the final straw.

Stevie_Palimo

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

There are two parts to this.

1. You have been mis-lead.
If you can get the company / the ombudsman / a court to agree this then you are entitled to cancel the contract - i.e. you give back the cards and they don't charge you for them.
It sounds like this has already happened, so nothing more to pursue here.
If you play it nicely you may be able to get a small goodwill gesture out of them, but as you are no longer their customer they may not want to show much goodwill as they don't have a customer relationship to maintain. Up to you if you want to try, though. Definitely not worth taking as far as the ombudsman or court, though.

2. You want to stop other people from being mis-lead.
Good for you.
As has been said, it sounds like it is the advertising that was misleading, so complain to the ASA.
Note that this won't get you anything personally, other than a warm fuzzy feeling that you've done the right thing.
If you are the only person to complain to the ASA about it then they may not do anything. They may have more pressing matters to deal with. But if others have already complained then yours might be the final straw.

Were they mis-led or quite simply too lazy to read the full terms and conditions as indeed most people are these days and then spit there dummy out when they dislike what is in place through there own laziness.

lisyloo

It pretty hard for us to give you an opinion without seeing the details.
I don't like wading through terms and conditions as much as the next man but there is a thing called "key facts" which avoids you having to do this. There is usually a "summary box" that details APR, annual fee etc. so you don't have to wade through documents.
It's impossible for anyone to give you an opinion without the details.

Mr_Goodkat

So it was Virgin Atlantic who sent you the invitation to apply for their MBNA branded credit cards?


Are you able to post up an image of the entire e-mail? It seems strange that there would be absolutely no mention of the annual fee, I would at the very least expect a * or a small number with a reference at the bottom of the e-mail to the fee.


Please can you also post the link you followed to apply?


I would be interested to see the e-mail and the link you followed to see if there is any reference to the fee somewhere and you have missed it.


I also assume you clicked to say you have read the three lots of terms and conditions without actually reading them, why? I never understand why people are so willing to enter agreements without fully reading and understanding what they are singing up for.


I am also surprised you did not do any further research as the MBNA website clearly states the fee and how does the Virgin Atlantic duo card compare to other MBNA credit cards or those provided by other card companies.


In the current climate the reward potential for this card would always make me expect there to be a significant annual fee attached so again unsure why you would expect there not to be?


I think you will be fighting a losing battle trying to pursue as you have cancelled the card and had the fee refunded. You might be able to get them to remove the credit search they performed on you if you can definitely prove that there is no reference to the fee in the mail or website you accessed hence why I am keen to see both.


You are however always on shaky ground when you have accepted terms and conditions but failed to read them fully// at all and that include the fee.

JKSandy

I agree everyone should read T&C's before signing but the OP does have a point in that fees etc should be clear and transparent.

JimmyTheWig

Stevie_Palimo wrote: »

Were they mis-led or quite simply too lazy to read the full terms and conditions as indeed most people are these days and then spit there dummy out when they dislike what is in place through there own laziness.

You can call them whatever names you want (well, technically, you can't on this forum but I'm not going to stop you!) but that's not the point.
The point is that they applied for something that it turns out that they didn't want. They did that on the basis of an advert. As you point out, they are not alone in doing something like this.
Whether you or I or others on this thread would have spotted the fee isn't the question. The OP didn't spot the fee and, we both suspect, many others wouldn't have either.

It's the advertiser's responsibility to get their message across clearly. Here they haven't.

Stevie_Palimo

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

You can call them whatever names you want (well, technically, you can't on this forum but I'm not going to stop you!) but that's not the point.
The point is that they applied for something that it turns out that they didn't want. They did that on the basis of an advert. As you point out, they are not alone in doing something like this.
Whether you or I or others on this thread would have spotted the fee isn't the question. The OP didn't spot the fee and, we both suspect, many others wouldn't have either.

It's the advertiser's responsibility to get their message across clearly. Here they haven't.

Having gone back over my post numerous times I cannot see where I am name calling in it ???? Saying people are lazy yes but name calling certainly not. I would imagine that the OP did not look further than there nose when applying for this and any charges would have been made clear to the average person that would read paperwork properly prior to adding a signature or as said above glancing over the main points.


This again as I say many times on the forum is quite clearly the get me a free lunch Britain at its best and people need to take responsibility for there own actions, End of.