Metro Bank -now accepting online applications

Mr_Goodkat

Anthorn wrote: »

So therefore we just allow banks to discriminate against a comparatively large section of the U.K. population with impunity. In that case where does the discrimination end?

Let me put this in more graphic terms: A person works all their life, pays all their taxes and insurance and pays all their bills and then when they get older they retire and take their state pension and whammo they cannot get a bank account!

So on the basis that Metro Bank rejected your application you have jumped to the conclusion that they are discriminating against people of state pension age and income?

What a totally ridiculous leap with no evidence to back it up!

You really need to move on rather than making a frivolous complaint!

colsten

Anthorn wrote: »

Have you actually read this thread? I don't have any of those things on my credit history now nor at any time in the past. Yet I was denied an account with Metro Bank. In fact over the 6 years life of my credit history there are also no late payments, no minimum payments, no missed payments, no cash advances, no defaults nor arrangements to pay. But then Metro Bank wouldn't know about that because they have not searched my credit history on all three CRAs.

Well, fine. You didn't match Metro's preferred customer profile. They are under no obligation to deal with you or anyone else, just as you are under no obligation to deal with them, or any other bank for that matter.

Whether Metro determined that they don't want you as a customer by doing a credit check or by checking other repositories (e.g. National Hunter) or by some internal algorithm is neither here nor there - they have decided not to offer you an account. You have a choice of at least 16 different banks aside from Metro, and amongst them are a fair few who offer basic bank accounts which are perfectly good accounts for pensioners, who, if they match the profile you described, will have at least one current account, anyway.

My earlier post was a response to this assertion by you:

Anthorn wrote: »

A person works all their life, pays all their taxes and insurance and pays all their bills and then when they get older they retire and take their state pension and whammo they cannot get a bank account!

It clearly is not true that "whammo they cannot get a bank account". Nobody will be left without a bank account unless they have a record of fraud.

ValiantSon

Anthorn wrote: »

So therefore we just allow banks to discriminate against a comparatively large section of the U.K. population with impunity. In that case where does the discrimination end?

Let me put this in more graphic terms: A person works all their life, pays all their taxes and insurance and pays all their bills and then when they get older they retire and take their state pension and whammo they cannot get a bank account!

They wouldn't be denied a bank account. Basic bank accounts are available. Metro Bank are entitled to reject you, or anybody else, as a customer. They are not a public service.

Anthorn wrote: »

Have you actually read this thread? I don't have any of those things on my credit history now nor at any time in the past. Yet I was denied an account with Metro Bank. In fact over the 6 years life of my credit history there are also no late payments, no minimum payments, no missed payments, no cash advances, no defaults nor arrangements to pay. But then Metro Bank wouldn't know about that because they have not searched my credit history on all three CRAs.

I have read this thread.

You don't know for certain that they didn't run a credit check because it can take some time to show up. You could easily have failed to meet their criteria without running a credit check, and so they didn't bother. Either way, they decided that you didn't fit the profile of the kind of customer they are looking for. They are entitled to do this. It may be because of your income, which, from previous posts, would seem to be relatively low. Again, they are entitled to do this.

Anthorn

Mr_Goodkat wrote: »

So on the basis that Metro Bank rejected your application you have jumped to the conclusion that they are discriminating against people of state pension age and income?

What a totally ridiculous leap with no evidence to back it up!

You really need to move on rather than making a frivolous complaint!

I have not jumped to any conclusion at all: Metro Bank did not do what they said they did and that is search for my credit history at Equifax. Moreover they did not search any of the three CRAs. What I am left with is the information on my application, age, address, occupation and income and/or their mysterious unwritten "criteria". I really don't know why I have to keep on posting the same information over and over but I think it might sink in sooner or later.

ValiantSon

Anthorn wrote: »

I have not jumped to any conclusion at all: Metro Bank did not do what they said they did and that is search for my credit history at Equifax. Moreover they did not search any of the three CRAs. What I am left with is the information on my application, age, address, occupation and income and/or their mysterious unwritten "criteria". I really don't know why I have to keep on posting the same information over and over but I think it might sink in sooner or later.

You don't need to. We've all understood, but we don't believe you have any grounds for a complaint. Metro Bank have done nothing wrong; they are entitled to reject you because of your income level. By your own admission they knew your income and therefore didn't need to do a credit check. Move on.

Anthorn

ValiantSon wrote: »

You don't need to. We've all understood, but we don't believe you have any grounds for a complaint. Metro Bank have done nothing wrong; they are entitled to reject you because of your income level. By your own admission they knew your income and therefore didn't need to do a credit check. Move on.

No you haven't understood: The related point is that Metro Bank do not state a minimum income for their current account on their website. So therefore your own assertion that they are entitled to reject an application based on income level is misleading. Either that or they are allowed to fall back on anything they invent to justify the rejection of an account which could justifiably be regarded as masking their real reason! Overall it stinks of discrimination!

ValiantSon

Anthorn wrote: »

No you haven't understood: The related point is that Metro Bank do not state a minimum income for their current account on their website. So therefore your own assertion that they are entitled to reject an application based on income level is misleading. Either that or they are allowed to fall back on anything they invent to justify the rejection of an account which could justifiably be regarded as masking their real reason! Overall it stinks of discrimination!

It doesn't matter how many times you say it, I, and everyone else who has replied, has understood. You, however, seem to be unwilling to accept that your rejection was completely legitimate, and so insist on telling us that we don't understand. (This is starting to feel like dealing with Harry Enfield's 'Kevin the teenager': "It's so unfair! You don't understand!").

Metro Bank do not need to state a minimum income! They are entitled to make that decision when they receive your application. It is not misleading of either Metro Bank, or me, to suggest that they can reject an application based on income. You are just wrong about this.

Yes, of course it is discrimination! By definition, rejecting anyone for any reason is discrimination! They are making a decision about whether or not to give someone an account. That does not mean that the discrimination is unfair, unlawful, or immoral.

Move on.

Anthorn

ValiantSon wrote: »

Metro Bank do not need to state a minimum income! They are entitled to make that decision when they receive your application. It is not misleading of either Metro Bank, or me, to suggest that they can reject an application based on income. You are just wrong about this..

So therefore what exactly is that minimum income? Is is £1,000 per month? £2,000 per month? Perhaps £10,000 p.a? £50,000 p.a? Perhaps £1m p.a? Perhaps it's whatever income they decide at the time of application?

WillPS

Anthorn wrote: »

So therefore what exactly is that minimum income? Is is £1,000 per month? £2,000 per month? Perhaps £10,000 p.a? £50,000 p.a? Perhaps £1m p.a? Perhaps it's whatever income they decide at the time of application?

My bold. That number may or may not change based on your application and other factors.

ValiantSon

Anthorn wrote: »

So therefore what exactly is that minimum income? Is is £1,000 per month? £2,000 per month? Perhaps £10,000 p.a? £50,000 p.a? Perhaps £1m p.a? Perhaps it's whatever income they decide at the time of application?

Probably that, in conjunction with other details from your application that tell them whether, in the round, you are worthwhile having as a customer. There's nothing wrong with that.