RBS refuse packaged bank account claim due to time limits

FamilyAccountant

We have complained about a packaged bank account my husband had from 1999. In 2008 I realised he was being charged for his bank account. We complained in 2016 after a successful PPI claim with RBS. RBS say the complain was made too late - outside the 6 years after the incident and over 3 years after we should have known about it. Has anyone else been refused due to time limits?

Nasqueron

FamilyAccountant wrote: »

We have complained about a packaged bank account my husband had from 1999. In 2008 I realised he was being charged for his bank account. We complained in 2016 after a successful PPI claim with RBS. RBS say the complain was made too late - outside the 6 years after the incident and over 3 years after we should have known about it. Has anyone else been refused due to time limits?

Yes, plenty. You have 6 years in law after you bought a product and 3 years after you would have reasonably known you had reason to complaint (such as closing an account) whichever is longer to complain. They are correctly applying a time bar. Your complaint is over.

dunstonh

FamilyAccountant wrote: »

We have complained about a packaged bank account my husband had from 1999. In 2008 I realised he was being charged for his bank account. We complained in 2016 after a successful PPI claim with RBS. RBS say the complain was made too late - outside the 6 years after the incident and over 3 years after we should have known about it. Has anyone else been refused due to time limits?

Plenty of people have been refused due to timebars. These exist in all walks of life to stop people making opportunistic/try-it-on or even fraudulent complaints/cases.

It hasnt been used much with PPI as it was hard to demonstrate the 3 year rule trigger date (the 6 year part was easy but both bits need to be met). Some firms have used it with PPI though by sending out invitations to complain.

With packaged bank accounts, again the 6 year rule part is easy. The three year rule is triggered from closure or change of the account. That happened in 2008 which is 9 years ago. So, well past the the 3 year rule.

if you were not happy about it and felt there was something wrong then you should have raised it in the three years following 2008.

It is too late now. the timebar appears to be applied correctly here.

FamilyAccountant

We didn't change the bank account in 2008. As we were now aware of the "benefits" this is when we started using them. They are saying because we opened another fee-free account in 2008 we should have known that it was possible to have one. I dispute that - my thinking is it's pointless to have two packaged bank accounts so of course the second one would be fee-free.

Nasqueron

FamilyAccountant wrote: »

We didn't change the bank account in 2008. As we were now aware of the "benefits" this is when we started using them. They are saying because we opened another fee-free account in 2008 we should have known that it was possible to have one. I dispute that - my thinking is it's pointless to have two packaged bank accounts so of course the second one would be fee-free.

If the bank told you about the packaged account benefits and costs in a letter more than 3 years ago that allows them to impose the time bar, you could also argue that the fact you started using them shows you knew about them and that the account was of use

Mersey_2

FamilyAccountant wrote: »

We have complained about a packaged bank account my husband had from 1999.


In 2008 I realised he was being charged for his bank account.


We complained in 2016

This is what has proved fatal to your reclaim. 6 years from the date of knowledge is the latest point for any civil claim.

FamilyAccountant

I have seen other people on this forum say they had a successful complaint more than 6 years after an account was closed. How is this possible?
I've heard 3 years and 6 years from when you should reasonably have known - which is correct?

dunstonh

I have seen other people on this forum say they had a successful complaint more than 6 years after an account was closed. How is this possible?

If they went to a different bank then that does not necessarily trigger the time bar. Or if the bank they were with never issued any documentation independently verifying the terms of the account and that it was optional. Banks are able to time bar a lot of these from after 2012 ish because around then they started issuing annual benefit statements confirming what the features were and that you could change account if you wished. These are also sufficient to trigger the time bar clock.

I've heard 3 years and 6 years from when you should reasonably have known - which is correct?

The 3 and 6 year rule is a combined rule. Both bits need to be satisfied. 6 years from sale of product and 3 years from being reasonably aware of an issue.

Nasqueron

FamilyAccountant wrote: »

I have seen other people on this forum say they had a successful complaint more than 6 years after an account was closed. How is this possible?
I've heard 3 years and 6 years from when you should reasonably have known - which is correct?

The law is simple, you get whichever is longer of the 2 rules below:

Either
6 years from taking out the product (this is fixed)
or
3 years from reasonably knowing when you could complain (this can vary)

Things that can trigger the 3 year time bar:

Closing the account
Changing the account
The bank writing to you listing the benefits and costs
The bank writing a Customer Contact Letter inviting you to complain if needed

It's unlikely anyone on here has closed the account and then complained more than 3 years after and won unless the bank auto-paid without investigating assuming the time bar was correctly applied

PSW

I had an account I closed in 2011 which I complained about on Friday just gone. The system to check, as I wasn't a current customer was down so I couldn't proceed with complaint. I received a call back on Monday as promised to go through my complaint. I was called back on Tuesday saying my complaint was upheld and they would refund me fees paid plus interest. Refund was in my account by lunch time.

-taff

Not all banks are the same, some wil pay out, some will not.
It's not a right to receive your money back.