Llyyds Bank 'cannot' stop sending mail for someone who no longer lives at my address

Westie983

Hi,

I hope this has been sorted now, but if you do get another letter, you can either put return to sender on the envelope and put it back in the post (which I know you have done already) or take it to a branch and make sure they tick the "returned post" on their profile so you will stop getting any post and they will be forced to change their address.

Westie983

jonesMUFCforever

I think you have all fallen to a danish figure with spiky hair.

Come on is this real>????

boo_star

JuicyJesus wrote: »

The issue is that this is not OP's information to be kept accurate, it's not OP's information to update and there is no provision for someone else to complain about the inaccuracy of someone else's data. The reasons that you can't call a bank and say "stop sending someone else's statements to the address you have on file for them" are fairly obvious.



The MPS is only for junk mail - that is, marketing communications to someone who is not presently a customer of a firm. These are not. These are a bank sending correspondence to its customer's last known - and advised - address. This isn't caught by the MPS.

The correct answer is for OP to stop caring and just keep putting them in the postbox or bin as they feel appropriate. It is a standard part of living in a house that someone else has lived in.

I worked for a bank.

Any mail returned as "not at this address" or similar resulted in no more mail being sent to their address and their banking facilities being suspended to prompt contact.

Obviously this wouldn't apply to situations where the customer was in debt but this is the correct way to handle things.

Sending out pieces paper that could be quite helpful in ID fraud isn't sensible.

foofi22

BoGoF wrote: »

This is where you lost all credibility.

Anxiety and distress for letters sent to your address that, frankly, do not concern you. Get real.

Typical of the compo culture we seem to have these days.

Whilst I agree with your compo culture is rife, I don't think it is a factor with the OP.

I can understand if someone was worried by this, as there are warnings upon warnings about scams these days. People receiving banking letters to people they don't know will worry some people.

I doubt that any of the people saying to the OP it is "not a problem", would not take any action in a similar situation.

BoGoF

18cc wrote: »

I will forward your twaddle comment to the Daily Telegraph sorry should have put the reference in my original post

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/ask-a-money-expert/barclaycard-keeps-sending-credit-card-offers-to-someone-who-has/

You do that.

The article is full of 'could try this' and 'maybe this'. Hardly a definitive opinion.

And as has been pointed out MPS only applies to marketing material. There is also a bit irony in citing GDPR then suggesting you register somebody else's name for MPS.

abz88

18cc wrote: »

I will forward your twaddle comment to the Daily Telegraph sorry should have put the reference in my original post

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/ask-a-money-expert/barclaycard-keeps-sending-credit-card-offers-to-someone-who-has/

That's a totally different situation though, that article relates to a bank sending credit card offers (ie marketing material) to someone that does not live at the address and is not an existing customer.
OP's issue is Lloyds are sending letters to an existing Lloyds customer to their previous address.

Uxb1

While at the moment I'd agree that having the stuff come through the door is merely at annoyance level - things have the possibility of getting rather worse.
When the debt collectors come knocking on the basis that this is the debtors address and are generally in their usual way being a bit aggressive then it all becomes rather less 'funny'.

So yes, in today's world the OP is right to want them to cease and to be taking action to make them do so.

JuicyJesus

boo_star wrote: »

I worked for a bank.

Any mail returned as "not at this address" or similar resulted in no more mail being sent to their address and their banking facilities being suspended to prompt contact.

Obviously this wouldn't apply to situations where the customer was in debt but this is the correct way to handle things.

Sending out pieces paper that could be quite helpful in ID fraud isn't sensible.

Same here, and that would be my advice too. But to be frank, even if they do keep sending mail after that, that is their (dumb) prerogative and it isn't any of OP's concern nor should it be of any particular worry as it won't affect them beyond having to walk it over to the postbox/bin as appropriate.

I've also, funnily enough, had my post marked as "gone away" at the address I was still living at somehow and had my account blocked as a result - such is life!

Brodiebobs

born_again wrote: »

Surprising that when you told them that they did not mark the customer as a "Gone away"

While they are correct that only account holder can change the address. Once mail is returned back "No longer at this address" they should stop and attempt to contact the customer by other methods they have on their system.
Might even come down to blocking card/account to force customer to call.

15 years of trying and getting mail returned is just stupid. I guess they are still using the account.

I also cant believed if the post has been returned (not binned) the bank hasn't done this, as it was fairly standard when i worked in banking 10 years ago.

I would be concerned about debt too, as when i lived in a rental bailiffs turned up for the previous occupant within a couple of weeks of me moving in. By coincidence we had the same (very common) surname and they refused to accept I wasn't related or knew their whereabouts, they aggressively tried to force their way in and take goods. Thankfully a neighbour heard the commotion and got rid of them for me. I never heard anything again but it was a scary situation to be in as a lone young female.

born_again

boo_star wrote: »

I worked for a bank.

Any mail returned as "not at this address" or similar resulted in no more mail being sent to their address and their banking facilities being suspended to prompt contact.

Obviously this wouldn't apply to situations where the customer was in debt but this is the correct way to handle things.

Sending out pieces paper that could be quite helpful in ID fraud isn't sensible.

I work for one.
And if mail is returned then customer is marked as a gone away. No mail goes out. Even if in debt. Other contact methods are used. If no reply then acc locked (if in debt might already be done) then other methods are used to trace person.