New TSB blunder as customers wrongly told they need to pay cash in within hours - MSE News

Former_MSE_Callum

TSB customers have wrongly received texts saying they don't have enough money to make payments and that they need to pay cash into their account that same day, MoneySavingExpert.com can reveal...

Read the full story:
'New TSB blunder as customers wrongly told they need to pay cash in within hours'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.

Shakin_Steve

From the article:

"I obviously did a thorough check of all my accounts with TSB online and checked pending payments. I could find no evidence relating to the text, I therefore called them.

"The impact was a huge amount of time and energy trying to sort the issue – time I don't have. They did not initially admit that it was sent in error, they did not send a text to correct the initial one."

Thorough check of all my accounts and checked pending payments.
The impact was a huge amount of time and energy.

Someone is after a few bob, methinks.

glider3560

Shakin_Steve wrote: »

From the article:

"I obviously did a thorough check of all my accounts with TSB online and checked pending payments. I could find no evidence relating to the text, I therefore called them.

"The impact was a huge amount of time and energy trying to sort the issue – time I don't have. They did not initially admit that it was sent in error, they did not send a text to correct the initial one."

Thorough check of all my accounts and checked pending payments.
The impact was a huge amount of time and energy.

Someone is after a few bob, methinks.

Depends how long it took for them to answer the phone.

KTF

Another round of compensation for people who were (not really) inconvenienced on the way then...

HornetSaver

KTF wrote: »

Another round of compensation for people who were (not really) inconvenienced on the way then...

Utter nonsense.



The IT things yes, completely agree with this characterisation in most cases. But when a bank texts you at the start of your working day and says "pay in money by lunchtime or you may be subject to bank fees" without justification, then yes, compensation is due.

Gers

What can go wrong will go wrong! It's been true for years and I apply it to technology now.

The more technologically 'advanced' society becomes the more we can whinge about it not working. A few moments of '!!!!!!' when this text came in does not merit compensation.

My debit card was declined the other day, a fault somewhere in the communication between machine and machine - a second try got the payment through smoothly. My 'no that can't be right' moment does not need any compensation.

redux

How long does it take to log in and look at the account?

How long does it take to see no problem but send some money across to it anyway, then phone up to discuss it later in the day?

Time some people don't have, they claim. How on earth do these people have time to do their other, more normal, banking transactions?

Before internet and telephone banking, or occasionally even now, some people might remember having to queue in the bank at lunchtime. Did anyone sounding off about this current problem do so, huge amount of time and energy? Not in the article.

HornetSaver

redux wrote: »

How long does it take to log in and look at the account?

That's a very open-ended question with respect to TSB...

How long does it take to see no problem but send some money across to it anyway, then phone up to discuss it later in the day?

I'd refer you to the answer I gave some moments ago. But furthermore you make the assumption that having multiple bank accounts all with sizeable sums of money in them is normal. It's far from normal now, and even more unusual back in the era of carving balances into stone tablets that you seem to yearn for.

Time some people don't have, they claim. How on earth do these people have time to do their other, more normal, banking transactions?

Time between the start of your commute and the end of your working day is not yours to do with as you wish, the things you can get done revolve around getting to work and doing your work. Besides, long gone are the days when an hour for lunch was standard in most professions, back in the days when people were far less productive than today. Even accepting the notion that giving up your entire break to sort a mess of this nature out is something you should take on the chin, thirty minutes to get to the increasingly small number of bank branches, queue up - particularly in a TSB branch when something like this is happening - and get back, is just a non-starter.

Before internet and telephone banking, or occasionally even now, some people might remember having to queue in the bank at lunchtime. Did anyone sounding off about this current problem do so, huge amount of time and energy? Not in the article.

I would again refer you to the previous answer. Besides, how often back in "the day" was a surge of people to the bank created by the bank manager knocking on thousands of people's doors, or telegraphs, carrier pidgeons or whatever other methods were used in "the day"?

mgdavid

HornetSaver wrote: »

Utter nonsense.



The IT things yes, completely agree with this characterisation in most cases. But when a bank texts you at the start of your working day and says "pay in money by lunchtime or you may be subject to bank fees" without justification, then yes, compensation is due.

Utter nonsense.

redux

HornetSaver wrote: »

That's a very open-ended question with respect to TSB...





I'd refer you to the answer I gave some moments ago. But furthermore you make the assumption that having multiple bank accounts all with sizeable sums of money in them is normal. It's far from normal now, and even more unusual back in the era of carving balances into stone tablets that you seem to yearn for.





Time between the start of your commute and the end of your working day is not yours to do with as you wish, the things you can get done revolve around getting to work and doing your work. Besides, long gone are the days when an hour for lunch was standard in most professions, back in the days when people were far less productive than today. Even accepting the notion that giving up your entire break to sort a mess of this nature out is something you should take on the chin, thirty minutes to get to the increasingly small number of bank branches, queue up - particularly in a TSB branch when something like this is happening - and get back, is just a non-starter.





I would again refer you to the previous answer. Besides, how often back in "the day" was a surge of people to the bank created by the bank manager knocking on thousands of people's doors, or telegraphs, carrier pidgeons or whatever other methods were used in "the day"?

You're missing most of the point of what I was saying, that the supposedly huge amount of time and energy in doing something about responding to the text message might be an exaggeration.

Though there were past log-in problems, there aren't any reports at the moment, so that aside comment relates to a previous complaint, not now. Thus a quick check of the balance, which establishes the text warning seems to be spurious, something to possibly discuss later, rather than urgently, isn't a huge investment of time and effort, like unnecessarily or necessarily going into the branch would be