How much compensation to ask for

Ergates

Ben8282 wrote: »

To be honest not sure why they are so concerned. Surely by now the account holder of the other account has realised something is wrong? But anyway this is really for the account holder of the other account to sort out.

A bank having incorrect information about you and/or your account relationships could result in negative consequences for you, or perhaps just some hassle that needs effort on your part to get sorted.

Extreme example: All banks in the UK send data on accounts to HMRC. HMRC plug this into their Connect system, which looks for connections between disparate sets of data, trying to find hidden links. It is *very* good at this. Now lets say, the person who's account has somehow ended up with your address/phone number is some kind of tax-evading dodgy geezer. Now, when HMRC look at their data and see: "Hmmm, this bank account over here has the same phone number as one that is owned by Mr Dodgy Geezer - maybe it's an account he opened with a fake ID to hide more of his money". All of a sudden, you're the subject of an HMRC investigation and having to explain to them that you're not an accomplice.

rawhammered

Id ask for at least a cool $1m.

born_again

Compensation does not equate to time lost.

So if you earn £100 a hour and say you spent 2 hours you will not get £200.

We are told not to say compensation, but recompense.

masonic

born_again wrote: »

So if you earn £100 a hour and say you spent 2 hours you will not get £200.

Well no, you would not be able to assert that because X pays you Y for a specific job role, then everyone should have to pay you that much per hour for anything else you do. But any good complaint should detail the amount of time spent dealing with the issue. If it gets to the FOS, they would want to know this and would probably ask for evidence of it.

Since the OP and co-owners of the business have clocked up >20 hours so far. At the minimum wage would equate to a compensation at the lower end of the FSCS moderate level for distress and inconvenience, which seems wholly appropriate for this sort of issue. So as a rule of thumb, it can be quite useful as an opening gambit.

"Moderate (less than £500): A customer had to contact you repeatedly to get something quite basic sorted out. For example, their address wasn’t updated when it should have been, or paperwork containing their personal information was shared with a third party by mistake. This may have caused the customer frustration and inconvenience."

pinkdalek

£63.42 should be sufficient.

Murmansk

pinkdalek wrote: »

£63.42 should be sufficient.

Thank you for your valued contribution!

pinkdalek

Murmansk wrote: »

Thank you for your valued contribution!

You're welcome. Let me know what you spend it on.