BOUNCE BACK LOAN DECLINED

Boobear13

karl9911uk said:

Been told by Santander that they can’t approve my application due to them deeming my account not to be the main spending business account! I have no other accounts, so not sure what they are on about. They have stated their reason is against loan rules.

I’ve just had exactly the same. I am going to call them next week and go through it with them. Hopefully my explanation will make them review The case.

RuthEBrowne

JohnEdwards123 said:

I have applied with my current bank for a bounce back loan . I fulfill all criteria for the loan and have supplied my SA302 etc. They have turned me down withouf explanation. I applied for 25% of turnover.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but as they're 100% guaranteed by the government, how can you be turned down? I didn't think credit checks came into it!?

Also to apply with any lender, you already need to be a banking customer to apply.
HELP AND ADVICE WOULD BE APPRECIATED AS I FEEL LIKE GOING FOR A LONG WALK OFF A SHORT PIER RIGHT NOW!
My anxiety is through the roof now and I dont know how I'm going to keep my business afloat

My husband has also had a decline from NatWest. However, he didn't even get as far as applying for the BBL. He applied to open a "feeder account" and this was declined. He had an email from Natwest to say that they had carried out credit checks and risk assessments and deemed his business to be too risky but did not actually state why. We are bewildered by this response as a) I didn't think credit checks were being carried out for BBL, b) and even if they are then both my husband and I have excellent credit ratings. The business was established in 1982 and has never had any court proceedings during all of that time. We have a healthy turnover of money going in and out of our personal current account. I have banked with NatWest for 25 years and my husband for 10 years. Where is the risk???? And this was just for a feeder account, not even the BBL. Absolutely staggered by this and intend to pursue as I feel it is incorrect treatment. Has anyone else been declined for feeder account??

[Deleted User]

@RuthEBrowne
From reading your post I would expect that part of the problem is not trading using a business account, lots of people have been declined for the feeder accounts, the need for which exists because people were operating businesses without business accounts, so lacking a solid and independent trading record.

The banks are not allowed to decline a BBL for bad credit, but many are using the feeder accounts as a way to do so which is entirely within the rules. Whilst the loan is 100% guaranteed the bank will still have to go through the hassle and cost of attempting to recover defaulted loans, so they are using the feeder accounts as a filter against that risk where they need to. 

There is no "incorrect treatment" here, the banks are allowed to decide who they offer accounts to, who they conduct business with, which is what they are doing. If I were you I would be asking the bank why they deemed him a risk for a feeder account. If your husband operates as a sole trader then your credit record would be irrelevant, only his, if he is a Ltd company and has been using a personal account that is regarded as bad enough practice to disqualify him straight away. 

dunstonh

My husband has also had a decline from NatWest. However, he didn't even get as far as applying for the BBL. He applied to open a "feeder account" and this was declined. He had an email from Natwest to say that they had carried out credit checks and risk assessments and deemed his business to be too risky but did not actually state why. 

They dont need to state why.  It just means he failed their criteria.

We are bewildered by this response as a) I didn't think credit checks were being carried out for BBL,

They are not.  However, they are for banking facilities.

The business was established in 1982 and has never had any court proceedings during all of that time. We have a healthy turnover of money going in and out of our personal current account.

Having no court proceedings is setting the bar very low.  Banks set a higher bar than that.  Turnover is largely irrelevant.   A low turnover, high profit company is more attractive than a high turnover low profit or loss making company.    However, it appears you don't have a business account. So, the bank has very little to go on.

Where is the risk?

We cannot answer that as you have not posted your financials for the last 5 or so years.

Absolutely staggered by this and intend to pursue as I feel it is incorrect treatment. Has anyone else been declined for feeder account??

You say you have had a business since 1982.   However, it appears you have not had a business account. So, you have been breaking the terms and conditions of the bank during that time.    Historically, banks turned a blind eye to that if you are not using business facilities or cashiers.   However, they are being a bit more fussy on that now. If its a limited company then it really will be a negative. 

You are within your rights to ask them why they rejected.  They are in their rights to say you didnt meet their criteria and not expand on that.   You have limited options beyond that as a BBL is not a nailed on certainty that they have to offer. If they feel it is too risky then they do not have to offer it.

gt94sss2

RuthEBrowne said:

JohnEdwards123 said:

I have applied with my current bank for a bounce back loan . I fulfill all criteria for the loan and have supplied my SA302 etc. They have turned me down withouf explanation. I applied for 25% of turnover.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but as they're 100% guaranteed by the government, how can you be turned down? I didn't think credit checks came into it!?

Also to apply with any lender, you already need to be a banking customer to apply.
HELP AND ADVICE WOULD BE APPRECIATED AS I FEEL LIKE GOING FOR A LONG WALK OFF A SHORT PIER RIGHT NOW!
My anxiety is through the roof now and I dont know how I'm going to keep my business afloat

My husband has also had a decline from NatWest. However, he didn't even get as far as applying for the BBL. He applied to open a "feeder account" and this was declined. He had an email from Natwest to say that they had carried out credit checks and risk assessments and deemed his business to be too risky but did not actually state why. We are bewildered by this response as a) I didn't think credit checks were being carried out for BBL, b) and even if they are then both my husband and I have excellent credit ratings. The business was established in 1982 and has never had any court proceedings during all of that time. We have a healthy turnover of money going in and out of our personal current account. I have banked with NatWest for 25 years and my husband for 10 years. Where is the risk???? And this was just for a feeder account, not even the BBL. Absolutely staggered by this and intend to pursue as I feel it is incorrect treatment. Has anyone else been declined for feeder account??

Yes, some have been declined feeder accounts. If you get nowhere with NatWest, you can apply elsewhere.
Have a look at https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2020/05/small-business-boost-as-bounce-back-loans-launched/#where for options

RuthEBrowne

dunstonh said:

My husband has also had a decline from NatWest. However, he didn't even get as far as applying for the BBL. He applied to open a "feeder account" and this was declined. He had an email from Natwest to say that they had carried out credit checks and risk assessments and deemed his business to be too risky but did not actually state why. 

They dont need to state way.  It just means he failed their criteria.

We are bewildered by this response as a) I didn't think credit checks were being carried out for BBL,

They are not.  However, they are for banking facilities.

The business was established in 1982 and has never had any court proceedings during all of that time. We have a healthy turnover of money going in and out of our personal current account.

Having no court proceedings is setting the bar very low.  Banks set a higher bar than that.  Turnover is largely irrelevant.   A low turnover, high profit company is more attractive than a high turnover low profit or loss making company.    However, it appears you don't have a business account. So, the bank has very little to go on.

Where is the risk?

We cannot answer that as you have not posted your financials for the last 5 or so years.

Absolutely staggered by this and intend to pursue as I feel it is incorrect treatment. Has anyone else been declined for feeder account??

You say you have had a business since 1982.   However, it appears you have not had a business account. So, you have been breaking the terms and conditions of the bank during that time.    Historically, banks turned a blind eye to that if you are not using business facilities or cashiers.   However, they are being a bit more fussy on that now. If its a limited company then it really will be a negative. 

You are within your rights to ask them why they rejected.  They are in their rights to say you didnt meet their criteria and not expand on that.   You have limited options beyond that as a BBL is not a nailed on certainty that they have to offer. If they feel it is too risky then they do not have to offer it.

Thank you for your information. However, the Natwest have been fully aware that we have been using the personal account as a business account for the last 10 years and also allowed us to have a £13,000 bank loan, (now paid in full) in 2015. My husband is a sole trader with an excellent credit rating. Therefore we have NOT "been breaking the terms and conditions of the bank during that time".

RuthEBrowne

MadMattUK said:

@RuthEBrowne
From reading your post I would expect that part of the problem is not trading using a business account, lots of people have been declined for the feeder accounts, the need for which exists because people were operating businesses without business accounts, so lacking a solid and independent trading record.

The banks are not allowed to decline a BBL for bad credit, but many are using the feeder accounts as a way to do so which is entirely within the rules. Whilst the loan is 100% guaranteed the bank will still have to go through the hassle and cost of attempting to recover defaulted loans, so they are using the feeder accounts as a filter against that risk where they need to. 

There is no "incorrect treatment" here, the banks are allowed to decide who they offer accounts to, who they conduct business with, which is what they are doing. If I were you I would be asking the bank why they deemed him a risk for a feeder account. If your husband operates as a sole trader then your credit record would be irrelevant, only his, if he is a Ltd company and has been using a personal account that is regarded as bad enough practice to disqualify him straight away. 

MadMattUK said:

@RuthEBrowne
From reading your post I would expect that part of the problem is not trading using a business account, lots of people have been declined for the feeder accounts, the need for which exists because people were operating businesses without business accounts, so lacking a solid and independent trading record.

The banks are not allowed to decline a BBL for bad credit, but many are using the feeder accounts as a way to do so which is entirely within the rules. Whilst the loan is 100% guaranteed the bank will still have to go through the hassle and cost of attempting to recover defaulted loans, so they are using the feeder accounts as a filter against that risk where they need to. 

There is no "incorrect treatment" here, the banks are allowed to decide who they offer accounts to, who they conduct business with, which is what they are doing. If I were you I would be asking the bank why they deemed him a risk for a feeder account. If your husband operates as a sole trader then your credit record would be irrelevant, only his, if he is a Ltd company and has been using a personal account that is regarded as bad enough practice to disqualify him straight away. 

Thank you for your information. However, the Natwest have been fully aware that we have been using the personal account as a business account for the last 10 years and also allowed us to have a £13,000 bank loan, (now paid in full) in 2015. My husband is a sole trader with an excellent credit rating. He is a member of the government trading standards body Buy With Confidence who carry out stringent checks before you can become a member. I think, therefore that the Natwest decision to decline a feeder account is incorrect.

dunstonh

RuthEBrowne said:

dunstonh said:

My husband has also had a decline from NatWest. However, he didn't even get as far as applying for the BBL. He applied to open a "feeder account" and this was declined. He had an email from Natwest to say that they had carried out credit checks and risk assessments and deemed his business to be too risky but did not actually state why. 

They dont need to state way.  It just means he failed their criteria.

We are bewildered by this response as a) I didn't think credit checks were being carried out for BBL,

They are not.  However, they are for banking facilities.

The business was established in 1982 and has never had any court proceedings during all of that time. We have a healthy turnover of money going in and out of our personal current account.

Having no court proceedings is setting the bar very low.  Banks set a higher bar than that.  Turnover is largely irrelevant.   A low turnover, high profit company is more attractive than a high turnover low profit or loss making company.    However, it appears you don't have a business account. So, the bank has very little to go on.

Where is the risk?

We cannot answer that as you have not posted your financials for the last 5 or so years.

Absolutely staggered by this and intend to pursue as I feel it is incorrect treatment. Has anyone else been declined for feeder account??

You say you have had a business since 1982.   However, it appears you have not had a business account. So, you have been breaking the terms and conditions of the bank during that time.    Historically, banks turned a blind eye to that if you are not using business facilities or cashiers.   However, they are being a bit more fussy on that now. If its a limited company then it really will be a negative. 

You are within your rights to ask them why they rejected.  They are in their rights to say you didnt meet their criteria and not expand on that.   You have limited options beyond that as a BBL is not a nailed on certainty that they have to offer. If they feel it is too risky then they do not have to offer it.

Thank you for your information. However, the Natwest have been fully aware that we have been using the personal account as a business account for the last 10 years and also allowed us to have a £13,000 bank loan, (now paid in full) in 2015. My husband is a sole trader with an excellent credit rating. Therefore we have NOT "been breaking the terms and conditions of the bank during that time".

Wrong.
The Natwest T&C : https://personal.natwest.com/personal/current-accounts/terms-and-conditions.html
1.2 Using your personal current account
Your account must not be used for business purposes.

So, the T&C has been breached.  As I said, banks have turned a blind eye to it in the past if you were not using the counter (for cash) or heavy volumes of transactions or business services.  Sometimes the staff couldn't be bothered looking but would do if you drew attention to yourself somehow.

RuthEBrowne

MadMattUK said:

@RuthEBrowne
From reading your post I would expect that part of the problem is not trading using a business account, lots of people have been declined for the feeder accounts, the need for which exists because people were operating businesses without business accounts, so lacking a solid and independent trading record.

The banks are not allowed to decline a BBL for bad credit, but many are using the feeder accounts as a way to do so which is entirely within the rules. Whilst the loan is 100% guaranteed the bank will still have to go through the hassle and cost of attempting to recover defaulted loans, so they are using the feeder accounts as a filter against that risk where they need to. 

There is no "incorrect treatment" here, the banks are allowed to decide who they offer accounts to, who they conduct business with, which is what they are doing. If I were you I would be asking the bank why they deemed him a risk for a feeder account. If your husband operates as a sole trader then your credit record would be irrelevant, only his, if he is a Ltd company and has been using a personal account that is regarded as bad enough practice to disqualify him straight away. 

"You need a business to set these up but don't need a business bank account. At least some of the banks offering these loans don't require you to have a business account with them". This quote is taken from Martin Lewis' advice page and written by Kit Sproson, Mortgages & Reclaim Writer. The Natwest criteria is that you don't need a business account but you do need a feeder account.

gt94sss2

NatWest have the right to choose who to open an account for. It's possible they may have been more sympathetic if you had applied for a business account to 'regularise' your dealings - as an existing customer -rather than applying for a feeder account.
All you can do is apply elsewhere and see if you're successful - many here are trying HSBC (but it's a slow process and their is no guarantee)