First Direct top customer service - not always

jd87

Not looking for advice here, just want to tell my story. When a company like First Direct are so often lauded for their good customer service, I think it's important to point out when they make mistakes. I'm sure lots of people here have had good experiences with them and I'm happy for you. I'm posting this on behalf a friend who I helped to apply for a First Direct current account.

After making the account application online, nothing was heard from First Direct for two weeks. Not even an automated email to confirm the application was received. We called them to check if everything was ok and they said it was being processed. When we asked what the hold up was and why we'd not even had an acknowledgement they refused to give any further details.

Eventually about another week later my friend received a letter saying they needed proof of ID and address. That's fair enough, he only recently registered on the electoral roll and his details don't show on it yet, so we expected extra checks. However reading the letter we found their security process to be outdated, arbitrary and onerous. Two recent, original documents are needed (eg. a passport and a bank statement), that's fine, fairly standard, but the documents must show full name. Many companies only print an initial (eg Mr J Bloggs) - this is not acceptable. Furthermore the documents must be certified by someone from a totally arbitrary list of occupations. A GP is acceptable, but any other medical doctor is not; an optician is ok, but not a veterinary surgeon.

We called First Direct to explain it would be difficult to meet the requirements and they said we only had a week to send the evidence back or the application would be cancelled as it is only valid for 30 days..! We explained we'd only just received the letter and they generously extended the deadline by a week.

My friend finally got documents certified and validated but they still weren't good enough. They refused to believe the bank statement sent wasn't an online print out (it was a copy sent by post by NatWest), and they wanted an official stamp by the certifier (their instructions had been followed exactly and there was no mention of stamps).

My friend has now cancelled the application and will be going elsewhere.

System

I would suggest you lodge a complaint - due to their lack of contact and limited timescales on offer ask for the credit searches removed as you've had to look elsewhere.

Shakin_Steve

FD seem to think that they're a cut above other banks. I've yet to see any evidence as to why.

EarthBoy

I think First Direct win their awards solely based on their telephone service. It's easy to get through to them, you don't have to press any buttons to choose the right option, or enter your account details, and they usually answer very quickly. If you only need straightforward banking and you're happy to ring them, you will probably think they're the bees' knees.

Away from the telephone service they are no better than any other bank, and positively antiquated in some respects.

meer53

jd87 wrote: »

Not looking for advice here, just want to tell my story. When a company like First Direct are so often lauded for their good customer service, I think it's important to point out when they make mistakes. I'm sure lots of people here have had good experiences with them and I'm happy for you. I'm posting this on behalf a friend who I helped to apply for a First Direct current account.

After making the account application online, nothing was heard from First Direct for two weeks. Not even an automated email to confirm the application was received. We called them to check if everything was ok and they said it was being processed. When we asked what the hold up was and why we'd not even had an acknowledgement they refused to give any further details.

Eventually about another week later my friend received a letter saying they needed proof of ID and address. That's fair enough, he only recently registered on the electoral roll and his details don't show on it yet, so we expected extra checks. However reading the letter we found their security process to be outdated, arbitrary and onerous. Two recent, original documents are needed (eg. a passport and a bank statement), that's fine, fairly standard, but the documents must show full name. Many companies only print an initial (eg Mr J Bloggs) - this is not acceptable. Furthermore the documents must be certified by someone from a totally arbitrary list of occupations. A GP is acceptable, but any other medical doctor is not; an optician is ok, but not a veterinary surgeon.

We called First Direct to explain it would be difficult to meet the requirements and they said we only had a week to send the evidence back or the application would be cancelled as it is only valid for 30 days..! We explained we'd only just received the letter and they generously extended the deadline by a week.

My friend finally got documents certified and validated but they still weren't good enough. They refused to believe the bank statement sent wasn't an online print out (it was a copy sent by post by NatWest), and they wanted an official stamp by the certifier (their instructions had been followed exactly and there was no mention of stamps).

My friend has now cancelled the application and will be going elsewhere.

First Direct have a system for accepting documents which can be uploaded online without being certified, has your friend asked about this ?

WillPS

EarthBoy wrote: »

I think First Direct win their awards solely based on their telephone service. It's easy to get through to them, you don't have to press any buttons to choose the right option, or enter your account details, and they usually answer very quickly. If you only need straightforward banking and you're happy to ring them, you will probably think they're the bees' knees.

Away from the telephone service they are no better than any other bank, and positively antiquated in some respects.

Yeah agreed. Can't believe how dated their online banking is.

TheEffect

Not sure why anyone contemplating FD as a long term bank account wouldn't just go with HSBC Advance instead. The only different seems to be a few extra 'Press 1 for this, press 2 for this' when calling.

Other than that, HSBC Advance offers the same regular saver, UK call centre, similar banking app, better internet banking, branches etc.

Archi_Bald

meer53 wrote: »

First Direct have a system for accepting documents which can be uploaded online without being certified, has your friend asked about this ?

Why would any customer, especially a new one, ask for this? If FD are as wonderful as so many of those so-called surveys claim, surely they would tell their customers and prospects of such a service?

Are you actually certain that this system exists? It sounds rather bizarre that stringent certification requirements apply normally, yet are not required it you upload documents?

Archi_Bald

TheEffect wrote: »

Other than that, HSBC Advance offers the same regular saver, UK call centre, similar banking app, better internet banking, branches etc.

HSBC RS is max £250 a month. Advance customers are required to deposit at least £1,750 a month. My branch in town has just been closed - doesn't matter to me as I rarely ever need a Branch. HSBC have only recently started offering switching incentives, FD had it for years. Just a few reasons why some people would prefer FD over HSBC Advance. Neither accounts would be my first choice.

robatwork

jd87 wrote: »

Furthermore the documents must be certified by someone from a totally arbitrary list of occupations. A GP is acceptable, but any other medical doctor is not; an optician is ok, but not a veterinary surgeon.

I would love to see their justification of what is an acceptable occupation. Here a fairly arbitrary list, and it's the government list of who is able to countersign your passport photo.

• accountant
• airline pilot
• articled clerk of a limited company
• assurance agent of recognised company
• bank/building society official
• barrister
• chairman/director of limited company
• chiropodist
• commissioner for oaths
• councillor, eg local or county
• civil servant (permanent)
• dentist
• director/manager/personnel officer of a VAT-registered company
• engineer - with professional qualifications
• financial services intermediary, eg a stockbroker or insurance broker
• fire service official
• funeral director
• insurance agent (full time) of a recognised company
• journalist
• Justice of the Peace
• legal secretary - fellow or associate member of the Institute of Legal Secretaries and PAs
• licensee of public house
• local government officer
• manager/personnel officer of a limited company
• member, associate or fellow of a professional body
• Member of Parliament
• Merchant Navy officer
• minister of a recognised religion - including Christian Science
• nurse - RGN or RMN
• officer of the armed services
• optician
• paralegal - certified paralegal, qualified paralegal or associate member of the Institute of Paralegals
• person with honours, eg an OBE or MBE
• pharmacist
• photographer - professional
• police officer
• Post Office official
• president/secretary of a recognised organisation
• Salvation Army officer
• social worker
• solicitor
• surveyor
• teacher, lecturer
• trade union officer
• travel agent - qualified
• valuer or auctioneer - fellows and associate members of the incorporated society
• Warrant Officers and Chief Petty Officers

It specifically says it CANNOT be a doctor who doesn't know you personally, but as you can see (ho ho) optician is OK. So this is the exact opposite of first direct's position on what constitutes a "reliable" occupation.


Of course, it's all total bollocks. I especially enjoyed the Person with OBE. Because so many of them are of SUCH high standing in society.

meer53

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Why would any customer, especially a new one, ask for this? If FD are as wonderful as so many of those so-called surveys claim, surely they would tell their customers and prospects of such a service?

Are you actually certain that this system exists? It sounds rather bizarre that stringent certification requirements apply normally, yet are not required it you upload documents?

Yes it exists, i've used it. If you have trouble getting documents certified if you call them they will offer this option if you have a compatible laptop/pc.