Cheque returned "Not signed in accordance with mandate".

dunstonh

Actually, a cheque is more reliable when getting close to deadline than faster payment.

A cheque just needs to be in their hands before the tax year end. it does not need to be cleared. A BACs payment needs to be in their hands and matched from the bank account to the work entry.

A bounced cheque should not cause the ISA allowance to be lost as long as the funds are made available quickly.

Ponsienella

Reaper wrote: »

If the delay turns out to be the banks's fault then I believe exceptions can be made and the ISA set up even if the deadline has passed.

If it turns out it was your fault then nothing can be done.

I suggest not leaving it to the last moment for this year's ISA.

My hubby has been into the bank and, unbelievably, they say they do not have my husband's signature on record!
When my husband suggested they could have contacted us he was told they do not have any telephone numbers for us either. This is quite surprising as we have had the same landline number since 1978 and we didn't set up the bank account until the 1980s.

It makes us wonder how on earth they managed to set up a joint current account for us with no signature for him and no contact details for either of us.

The person he spoke to did admit to not knowing enough about ISAs to comment fully and has escalated it as a complaint. We should be contacted initially within 48 hours about it.

She did mention there may be a possible solution where they could set up an ISA with them and adjust the dates (sounds a bit suspect to me).

We just need to wait and see what can be done now.

We were planning to put this year's allowance in today but will have to hold fire on that now ....as they haven't got my hubby's signature on file that cheque would also be bounced. LOL.

Ponsienella

Flobberchops wrote: »

If the husband is for some reason less trusting of electronic transfers and encrypted online banking than he is of the notoriously fraud-riddled cheque system, why not go into a branch of Natwest in person and have a transfer made by Faster Payments?

I know it's a moot point now, but honestly, I'm scratching my head trying to work out the logic.

What does it matter that he wanted to write a cheque? Okay, there are are other quicker methods of transferring money but, nevertheless, Barclays received the unpaid cheque back and managed to write to my husband in time for the letter to reach him yesterday so, if it hadn't have been rejected, it would have been cleared through the system in time too.

The fact is there has been some sort of balls up that has probably resulted in him losing the tax-free allowance on the interest on £15,240 of the money he'd have in his ISA this year.

Ponsienella

dunstonh wrote: »

Actually, a cheque is more reliable when getting close to deadline than faster payment.

A cheque just needs to be in their hands before the tax year end. it does not need to be cleared. A BACs payment needs to be in their hands and matched from the bank account to the work entry.

A bounced cheque should not cause the ISA allowance to be lost as long as the funds are made available quickly.

Thanks. I hope you are right.

POPPYOSCAR

Flobberchops wrote: »

Ha! That's ballsy. Not sure how effective it'd be as a policy though, surely people would very rapidly cotton on to the true purpose and the bank would suffer a net loss due to reputational damage, customers leaving, etc?

[edit] As to the OP's predicament, it's unfortunate they chose such an unreliable method of transferring money with such a tight deadline. A cheque that kind of value would attract extra scrutiny for possible tampering or signs of fraud, so even something like a slight uncertainty in signature, misspelling or even a perceived variation in handwriting or change of pen colour could trigger a rejection. Even if everything had been in order, there's a chance the cheque clearance timescale would have put them just outside of the last tax year.

If the husband is for some reason less trusting of electronic transfers and encrypted online banking than he is of the notoriously fraud-riddled cheque system, why not go into a branch of Natwest in person and have a transfer made by Faster Payments?

I know it's a moot point now, but honestly, I'm scratching my head trying to work out the logic.

The cheque does not have to be cleared.


I have written cheques to an ISA the day before the deadline with no problems.

AnotherJoe

Ponsienella wrote: »

What does it matter that he wanted to write a cheque? Okay, there are are other quicker methods of transferring money

That is precisely why it matters !

Ponsienella

AnotherJoe wrote: »

That is precisely why it matters !

Joe, I really do get it but, as another poster said, the value of the electronic transfer might have put the transaction into query anyway.

If they hadn't rejected it due to supposedly not having my husband's signature in their records, it would have met the deadline for the tax year end and everything would be honky dory.

dunstonh

Joe, I really do get it but, as another poster said, the value of the electronic transfer might have put the transaction into query anyway.

Yep. The electronic transfer has to be matched to the work entry. So, even if the money arrived at 9pm on the 5th, there has to be someone in the office there to know the money is arriving, looking at the bank account to match it and process the work before midnight.

A number of platforms had the 30th as the last date recommended for bank transfers. Whereas a cheque posted on the 4th would suffice as long as it got there.

Ponsienella

Well, not much to report on our complaint.

We have each received a letter telling us that a cheque has been returned for one of about 10 reasons that are listed.
In addition we received a letter addressed to both of us stating the cheque was disallowed as it has a signature on it which doesn't match the one held. The bank suggested going into any branch and providing them with a signature.

As my hubby was told they didn't have his signature and this letter stated the signature didn't match the one they had, I wanted to determine which explanation was correct.
I therefore went into my local branch and finally managed to obtain a copy of signatures they hold for our account. (First of all I had to argue to even get my own signature as I was told it was confidential information!).

The signature they hold for me matches my current signature. I was informed they obtained it in 2006 but I know I was not asked to provide it to them then so they must have uploaded it from, say, a cheque I have signed at some point. The document states that there is no signature held for my husband.

When I pointed out that I'd not been asked for my signature so they must have obtained it without asking me and asked why they hadn't done the same for my husband, I was told they hadn't got his signature on anything. I said they must have as he took out a credit card with them about 3 years ago.

My husband telephoned the number he was given for the complaints department but all he got was an automated service stating that complaints are dealt with within 4 weeks. As his understanding was that he would be contacted regarding it within 48 hours he spoke to the branch who informed him that branches have 48 hours to resolve complaints but it is 4 weeks if the complaint has to be escalated.

My husband has since received another standard letter telling him they are dealing with his complaint and will contact him within the next 4 weeks to update him on the progress made if they have been unable to resolve it.

So, no further forward and frankly I can't see this ending favourably for us.

dunstonh

In addition we received a letter addressed to both of us stating the cheque was disallowed as it has a signature on it which doesn't match the one held. The bank suggested going into any branch and providing them with a signature.

Then it should have used the reason "signature differs". That is unless the signature is totally different and could be a different person. Although from the rest of your post, we know it wasnt down to that.

The signature they hold for me matches my current signature. I was informed they obtained it in 2006 but I know I was not asked to provide it to them then so they must have uploaded it from, say, a cheque I have signed at some point. The document states that there is no signature held for my husband.

Signature cards could get worn out over time. Back in my banking days, they were either stapled on sellotaped onto the card. With worn out cards, if a signature that was the same was available (such as a cheque or application form for something) you would replace it.

My husband telephoned the number he was given for the complaints department but all he got was an automated service stating that complaints are dealt with within 4 weeks. As his understanding was that he would be contacted regarding it within 48 hours he spoke to the branch who informed him that branches have 48 hours to resolve complaints but it is 4 weeks if the complaint has to be escalated.

The complaints process has two tiers. Those that can be resolved quickly and provide a resolution you are happy with and those that will take longer or need escalating as you are not happy with the immediate response. The latter has 8 weeks (not 4 weeks)