We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Its worth pursuing the Bank to the FOS

Mersey_2
Posts: 1,679 Forumite
Only a minor sum but thought it'd give hope to others.
I'd requested NatWest action payments via Actionline [their telephone banking] in Feb.
Sadly, one of the 2 payments was not made.
I complained via email to [EMAIL="customer.relations@natwest.com"]customer.relations@natwest.com[/EMAIL]
I received an auto acknowledgement from their outsourced service overseas, but after 9 weeks, I had still had no reply in the form of a holding letter in the post nor a substantive response.
So I emailed the CEO. I received an apology from a member of the Executive Team, although the same was rather dismissive, seeming to suggest that this happens a lot and online banking is best.
However a fortnight on, I had still failed to receive any response to my complaint, so I referred the matter to the FOS.
NatWest apologised, offering £30 for the failure and failure to send a complaint response letter. However they stated that they were not able to find a recording of the call so could not verify what I claimed.
I rejected this, as given that 1 of the 2 payments was actioned, clearly the call had been made and they must have some records of this. £30 seemed appropriate for the failure to action the payment itself, but not for the 11 week delay in responding (after my chasing); the failure to keep phone records; or my inconvenience and time spent in having to send 4 emails and make 2 extra calls as a result.
Over 6 months later, I today received a call from the FOS stating that they agreed with myself, suggesting a global offer in the sum of £150 was appropriate for the four failings identified and I've accepted this. They discovered that the person at NatWest with whom I spoke no longer works there, nor does the person in the Executive Team who responded inappropriately.
In short, if you've been wronged, refer the matter until you are satisfied.
I'd requested NatWest action payments via Actionline [their telephone banking] in Feb.
Sadly, one of the 2 payments was not made.
I complained via email to [EMAIL="customer.relations@natwest.com"]customer.relations@natwest.com[/EMAIL]
I received an auto acknowledgement from their outsourced service overseas, but after 9 weeks, I had still had no reply in the form of a holding letter in the post nor a substantive response.
So I emailed the CEO. I received an apology from a member of the Executive Team, although the same was rather dismissive, seeming to suggest that this happens a lot and online banking is best.
However a fortnight on, I had still failed to receive any response to my complaint, so I referred the matter to the FOS.
NatWest apologised, offering £30 for the failure and failure to send a complaint response letter. However they stated that they were not able to find a recording of the call so could not verify what I claimed.
I rejected this, as given that 1 of the 2 payments was actioned, clearly the call had been made and they must have some records of this. £30 seemed appropriate for the failure to action the payment itself, but not for the 11 week delay in responding (after my chasing); the failure to keep phone records; or my inconvenience and time spent in having to send 4 emails and make 2 extra calls as a result.
Over 6 months later, I today received a call from the FOS stating that they agreed with myself, suggesting a global offer in the sum of £150 was appropriate for the four failings identified and I've accepted this. They discovered that the person at NatWest with whom I spoke no longer works there, nor does the person in the Executive Team who responded inappropriately.
In short, if you've been wronged, refer the matter until you are satisfied.
Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
0
Comments
-
Or moan enough until you get enough compo to make you happy
Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards