What can I do when RBS refuse to remove a late payment from credit profile?

RBS_Sucks

themull1 wrote: »

RBS do a credit limit alert that lets you know when you're reaching your limit.

Hi,

Yes I've since found this out. Unfortunately all the buffers which could have came into place have only become known after they could've been useful. I never thought I would have required such a tool however on the basis that it's possible to exceed a credit limit I believe it would be useful to now look at using this.

Thanks

RBS_Sucks

bairn7 wrote: »

But, as other people are alluding to, did you ask for the current Ts & Cs applying to your account (including any variations from the originals)?

If no, then you have to ask them for this. If yes, and you received current terms and conditions without any explicit mention of them having the ability to take the overlimit amount plus the standard interest, you would have a valid complaint IMHO.

However, to be frank, I would expect most people (particularly those in business) to know how bank accounts and credit cards work. The 'limit' in these cases is hardly every a hard cut-off. Can you honestly say that you've never heard of people going over their limit before?

Nonetheless, you may have a valid complaint on the DD point if you can obtain a copy of your current terms. The other arguments are masking the real issue on this thread. I don't think you'll get any further useful input here.

ETA: my post crossed with yours - you clearly state that you don't have the current Ts & Cs. PLEASE get these and then come back if there is still an issue. I suspect this will clear things up for you.

Hi Bairn,

I did ask for the current terms but unfortunately they only provided the originals.

In relation to people going over there limit, I can honestly say it's something I've never discussed or considered in the past and assumed a credit limit to be exactly that, a limit. I've never had any reason to look into this or discuss it therefore to answer your question, yes I have never heard of people going over their limit.

I agree with you that some arguments are being brought out which don't discuss the matter at hand and the primary reason for this thread. I accept responsibility that I did not check the statements however the point being that the bank still have made a mistake. I've equally made a mistake but my mistake has not negatively affected the bank in any meaningful way however there mistake has resulted in a missed payment marker which seems to apply for 6 years and would have a major influence on the ability to obtain any future credit should it be required. The most obvious level of credit being when I come to remortgage which surprisingly enough is with RBS also at present.

Regards

bairn7

How do you know the bank have made a mistake if you haven't checked your current terms and conditions?

So the bank didn't supply current terms when you asked. Not good customer service but they are not wrong simply because they didn't comply with the terms that you have in your possession...these are likely irrelevant now having been updated or replaced.

My complaint to them at this stage would be the lack of provision of current terms. Resolve that complaint, check your current terms and then look into what other action to take depending on the outcome of that.

RBS_Sucks

bairn7 wrote: »

How do you know the bank have made a mistake if you haven't checked your current terms and conditions?

So the bank didn't supply current terms when you asked. Not good customer service but they are not wrong simply because they didn't comply with the terms that you have in your possession...these are likely irrelevant now having been updated or replaced.

My complaint to them at this stage would be the lack of provision of current terms. Resolve that complaint, check your current terms and then look into what other action to take depending on the outcome of that.

Hi Bairn,

I know they have made a mistake on the basis of the terms and conditions provided which were the original terms and conditions. You could of course be absolutely correct that these could've been updated and may no longer apply however equally I believe the bank should be able to demonstrate and prove that these terms and conditions were communicated effectively. A change of terms and conditions is a change of contract therefore a change of contract is an important event and should be dealt with in a controlled manner. If the bank claim to have sent a letter then as a minimum I'd expect them to prove this letter was received. They may not be able to do this however should any contract I have in place with any creditor change I expect to be notified and for it to be done so clearly. This is not the case.

Further, in consideration that the RBS advisors cannot fully address my concerns either and these are people you would expect to either know or be able to find out, I continue to have the belief there is an error here and at the very least a misunderstanding. I don't think it's too much to ask that in light of this error/misunderstanding that a missed payment marker which will affect me for 6 years is removed from my credit profile.

The original terms and conditions demonstrated a crystal clear error in my opinion from 2 primary perspectives. If this has been updated since then of course it may change things however equally I would ask the bank to prove these changes were received and accepted by me which of course I do not believe to the the case.

Going forward I of course understand the matter fully and would have no defence should it ever happen again but I fully believe the bank have made at least one error if not more here and all I ask is that they correct this.

bairn7

At the moment, I would say that it is too much to ask for the marker to be removed.

Your principal complaint here at the moment is lack of provision of current terms and conditions (and proof of communication of any and all variations).

I think deep down you know that your original terms will have been varied in some way. Everyone with a credit card knows how often they get notified of changes to terms and conditions. I've had 2 this year alone.

At the moment, it sounds like you just want to get out of having a marker on your credit file and are using the lack of provision of current terms as an excuse, without actively seeking to find out what your current terms are, presumably from fear that they contain the dreaded clause that your original terms don't. Sorry.

As I've said, you first need to pursue a complaint for provision of your current terms and see what they say. You can't rely on your original terms just because the bank are being difficult.

I'm afraid I can't help any further.

RBS_Sucks

bairn7 wrote: »

At the moment, I would say that it is too much to ask for the marker to be removed.

Your principal complaint here at the moment is lack of provision of current terms and conditions (and proof of communication of any and all variations).

I think deep down you know that your original terms will have been varied in some way. Everyone with a credit card knows how often they get notified of changes to terms and conditions. I've had 2 this year alone.

At the moment, it sounds like you just want to get out of having a marker on your credit file and are using the lack of provision of current terms as an excuse, without actively seeking to find out what your current terms are, presumably from fear that they contain the dreaded clause that your original terms don't. Sorry.

As I've said, you first need to pursue a complaint for provision of your current terms and see what they say. You can't rely on your original terms just because the bank are being difficult.

I'm afraid I can't help any further.

If I believed all terms and conditions to be reasonable I would accept the matter although as you can imagine I'd still be unhappy about it. I do not believe this to be the case hence why I certainly cannot accept the matter regardless of additional opinions.

My principle complaint is in the clarity of the terms and conditions which is the sole basis of how I ensure standing orders are set up from my secondary account to reach my bank account which accepts direct debits. This implies the maximum payment to be taken is likely to be 2.25% of my credit limit therefore to ensure say 5% of my credit limit is always available would be a reasonable provision to make to cover any unforeseen expenses above my minimum amount. Unfortunately they've attempted to take a far greater amount which in total equates to almost 20% of the balance. I'm sure you agree this is considerably more.

The basis of how much I transfer to the account was based on the terms and conditions and the fact I'm of the opinion that I was lead to believe my credit limit was my limit of borrowing. This has turned out to be different and unclear terms and conditions as well as potentially inaccurate terms and conditions are the sole cause of this in my opinion.

The terms and conditions may well have been varied however I have been provided with no evidence that I've been advised of this and in light of how serious a missed payment notification can be on a credit profile I believe it's more than fair to receive evidence of this.

I'm sure you may think it to be an excuse however the amount I transfer to that account is based on the minimum amount stated in the terms and conditions. This is the only place I was able to obtain the information hence it's importance. I thoroughly believe the terms and conditions are what have lead to the misunderstanding here which has caused this situation above all else.

I appreciate your comments however on the basis of my belief I will pursue this matter fully and beyond the Ombudsman if need be as the consequences of a missed payment on my credit profile are simply too great. This becomes even more frustrating as the matter has never been about affordability or the ability to keep up with payments and has only been caused by a misunderstanding and/or errors in the terms and conditions.

jonesMUFCforever

RBS_Sucks wrote: »

I haven't looked as yet but in all honesty I don't see why it matters. It's almost guaranteed to show the incorrect amount they attempted to take however that is the overall point in the matter is that the contract provided by them states the maximum amount which can be taken is 2.25% of the balance. It makes no mention whatsoever of also taking the amount over the credit limit.

To clarify, it would make no difference what the statement amount showed as ultimately the amount attempted to be taken was significantly over the amount the contracted percentage states they may take.

You are having a laugh now right.
You don't want to look because you know it will show the amount they tried to take but your bank bounced.
No more comments from me on this - go on and waste the ombudsman's time and then waste some more of your own money in suing but IMO they have acted correctly.

eskbanker

RBS_Sucks wrote: »

I did ask for both the original terms and current terms however unfortunately they only provided the original terms. I agree this could be updated however I believe it to be reasonable for any update on an agreement to also obtain consent and certainly at least proof the update was not only communicated but acknowledged which has not been the case.

What do your original Ts & Cs say about how they'll communicate variations, as there will be a clause in there somewhere that defines how they'll handle changes to terms? Most will reserve the right to do so by notification rather than explicit agreement, i.e. it would be unusual for this to involve active consent from the account holder or even acknowledgement, although admittedly my experience is more with personal accounts than business ones.

chambta

The one negative marker is very unlikely to have any repercussions in the medium to long term.

I wouldn't waste any more energy on it.

RBS_Sucks

jonesMUFCforever wrote: »

You are having a laugh now right.
You don't want to look because you know it will show the amount they tried to take but your bank bounced.
No more comments from me on this - go on and waste the ombudsman's time and then waste some more of your own money in suing but IMO they have acted correctly.

I think the only person wasting their time here is yourself as you seem hellbent on ignoring every reasonable point made. I'm really not sure why or what you have to gain or even why you keep on saying the same irrelevant things in ignorance of everything that's been said but I guess you will have your reasons.

My point being that regardless of the statement amount which is almost guaranteed to reflect the amount taken, the contractual amount they're entitled to take differs based on the terms and conditions. Highly relevant and highly ignored by you hence why you're comments become more and more invalid as the discussion goes on.

Thank you anyway for your comments but in future please read comments posted to obtain a greater idea of the situation before offering your advice or knowledge.