Best way to complain to Ombudsman about Monzo ?

jasonwatkins

This might seem like a silly question, but I've never done anything like this before and I'd like to do it properly.   Would it be best to keep it all in writing or via email ?.

I might have made a slight mistake already though as I have just declined the opportunity to have their complaints team look in to the situation.

DullGreyGuy

The Financial Ombudsman will only look at a complaint after you have already complained to the company itself and either 1) you have received a final response/deadlock letter or 2) 8 weeks have passed since you made your complaint, which ever is sooner.

You state you've refused to have their complaints team look at it which would in effect mean you've yet to make a complaint and so the clock hasnt started ticking on being able to take the matter to the ombudsman and obv you wont get a final response if the team arent looking at it.

You can speak to the ombudsman beforehand but you are talking to a basic call centre who have to cover a vast array of topics so have a relatively shallow depth of understanding. They can offer to raise the complaint for you but be aware this is a stock letter where they can add 4 lines of text of what your complaint is and so you are dependent on them having understood it properly and being able to summerise it down to 4 lines (most complaints tend to be much longer )

Complaints just need to follow the process set out by the company, most accept complaints by phone, email, letter, live chat etc. Personally prefer email because there is no ambiguity over what was said but things can be quicker to do over the phone sometimes.

jasonwatkins

DullGreyGuy said:

The Financial Ombudsman will only look at a complaint after you have already complained to the company itself and either 1) you have received a final response/deadlock letter or 2) 8 weeks have passed since you made your complaint, which ever is sooner.

You state you've refused to have their complaints team look at it which would in effect mean you've yet to make a complaint and so the clock hasnt started ticking on being able to take the matter to the ombudsman and obv you wont get a final response if the team arent looking at it.

You can speak to the ombudsman beforehand but you are talking to a basic call centre who have to cover a vast array of topics so have a relatively shallow depth of understanding. They can offer to raise the complaint for you but be aware this is a stock letter where they can add 4 lines of text of what your complaint is and so you are dependent on them having understood it properly and being able to summerise it down to 4 lines (most complaints tend to be much longer )

Complaints just need to follow the process set out by the company, most accept complaints by phone, email, letter, live chat etc. Personally prefer email because there is no ambiguity over what was said but things can be quicker to do over the phone sometimes.

Thankyou, that's very useful.

I might give the Ombudsman a ring first of all, as the complaint in itself is actually fairly simple so they could certainly summarise it in 4 lines, although I will confess there's also an element of principle involved as well which might make it seem a tad unecessary.

I had an account with them back in January which I never used and ultimately closed.   I tried to re-join recently and was told the phone number was "already in use".   I emailed them to ask if the account could be re-opened and submitted the required photograph with ID.   I got this in response ..

We’re sorry we can’t say for sure and give you more certainty but we just can’t predict how circumstances might be different in future. We can tell you though that you won’t be able to open another account with Monzo right now. I'm really sorry that i'm not able to go into this further.

From my side, my only "crime" is closing the account.   The only thing that has changed in my life since January is that I'm a year older.   Literally everything else is the same.

I have no CIFAS markers and my credit rating has actually improved so for them to tell me that the fundemental way they do business "can't be predicted" is absurd and has made me want to take it further. 

DullGreyGuy

You dont have a statutory right to be their customer, if they dont want you they can deny you account as long as it isnt because of a protected characteristic (race, religion, sexual orientation etc)

jasonwatkins

DullGreyGuy said:

You dont have a statutory right to be their customer, if they dont want you they can deny you account as long as it isnt because of a protected characteristic (race, religion, sexual orientation etc)

I get that, I do, but when their account opening procedure, and requirements, seemingly have not changed and are one of their main selling points then I find it hard to understand why I have, in effect, been banned.

If it was something to do with money laundering checks or some form of security issue that meant someone could not re-open or re-join and this was explained in the T's & C's then I can accept that, but it isn't.   They continue to promote the notion that you only essentially need to have a pulse and they'll open an account for you but this is clearly not the case according to them, and they can't tell you one day to the next what might happen.

adindas

Indeed they are unpredictable. Like in any other professions and banking are not the exception. There  are always be newbies, novices, lazy, incompetent people  working in banking professions. Unfortunately, in my personal opinion there is nothing we could do about it.

There are already reasonable number of the case like your case in this MSEs. As another person has said we do not have a statutory right. They could choose whoever they want to become their customers.

I myself got rejected to open accounts in the past in a few occasions. Also I have good credit history, never have loan, no defaults, always pay credicard in full unless during promotional periods, have managed to open a few dozens of Bank Accounts and Credit-cards to this date.

My personal experience about a few year ago I tried to open a saving account with Scottish BS. They asked me to send "certified" proof of address, proof id ID as they could not verify me online. In fact, I was already their customers when they had a very good saving products but I already close it as it is no longer attractive. A few months ago I tried again to open it online, get approved straight away.

Virgin Money M-plus account also got rejected where in fact I have been having numerous regular saving account with them, and still have it when I applied.

IMO you might be more successful, if you leave it and apply again later say in one year rather than wasting time complaining to FOS with llittle chance to be successful. But people could always try if time does not matter for them.

[Deleted User]

jasonwatkins said:

DullGreyGuy said:

You dont have a statutory right to be their customer, if they dont want you they can deny you account as long as it isnt because of a protected characteristic (race, religion, sexual orientation etc)

I get that, I do, but when their account opening procedure, and requirements, seemingly have not changed and are one of their main selling points then I find it hard to understand why I have, in effect, been banned.

If it was something to do with money laundering checks or some form of security issue that meant someone could not re-open or re-join and this was explained in the T's & C's then I can accept that, but it isn't.   They continue to promote the notion that you only essentially need to have a pulse and they'll open an account for you but this is clearly not the case according to them, and they can't tell you one day to the next what might happen.

If you opened an account and never used it and that cost them money (sending the card etc) then they are quite within their rights to refuse you another account, they can maintain a blacklist if they want to. The FOS are not going to force them to open an account for you.

jasonwatkins

Thankyou @adindas

I do have a pretty poor credit rating as it stands, even though it has definitely improved since January and certainly wasn’t a barrier to opening an account with them back then.

I’m actually pretty set as far as banking goes so it’s not that i explicitly need an account with Monzo I suppose but their attitude about it and lack of explanation as to why I’ve been banned is probably what has caused this feeling.

There’s also likely an element of my autism at play as well I suppose as I do find things like this quite hard to let go even though I know I should.

Voyager2002

To summarise:
1. The FOS would only get involved once you had exhausted the complaints process, something you have yet to do.
2. In any case you do not have a valid complaint.

In this case it seems clear that your telephone number is already recorded on Monzo's systems as being in use by a customer, so their computer does not allow them to open another account with that number. They could doubtless get around this if they wanted to, but the people you have spoken with do not know how to do this. Personally I would simply move on, but if you think it worth the trouble then raise the matter with their complaints team. The people within banks who handle complaints are generally good at solving problems, and would be able to speak to someone with the authority to open an account for you. I have no idea whether this would actually happen, and in any case they are free not to offer you an account for any or no reason.

jasonwatkins

Voyager2002 said:

To summarise:
1. The FOS would only get involved once you had exhausted the complaints process, something you have yet to do.
2. In any case you do not have a valid complaint.

In this case it seems clear that your telephone number is already recorded on Monzo's systems as being in use by a customer, so their computer does not allow them to open another account with that number. They could doubtless get around this if they wanted to, but the people you have spoken with do not know how to do this. Personally I would simply move on, but if you think it worth the trouble then raise the matter with their complaints team. The people within banks who handle complaints are generally good at solving problems, and would be able to speak to someone with the authority to open an account for you. I have no idea whether this would actually happen, and in any case they are free not to offer you an account for any or no reason.

I have had the same telephone number for the last couple of years and it was the same when I used it to open an account in January, so the only way it would be in use by anyone else would be if it was being used fraudulently.

DullGreyGuy

jasonwatkins said:

I’m actually pretty set as far as banking goes so it’s not that i explicitly need an account with Monzo I suppose but their attitude about it and lack of explanation as to why I’ve been banned is probably what has caused this feeling.

You have to realise how modern contact centres work... the person you are speaking to will have absolutely no idea what the reason is for you being accepted/rejected or what price/APR etc you get offered if you are accepted. 

In attempts for consistency, control and to deskill an agent simply puts details into a system and reads back what the system tells them to. They arent empowered to change the decision and arent told the reason for it. If the answer is no there is no point getting into a debate about the reason is (eg an old CCJ) because the agent cant change the decision anyway even if you explain the CCJ was a mistake by your insurance company who are in the process of having it removed.

When I worked in a call centre, many moons ago, training for enquiries was 6 months, we were paid £4/66% more than the order staff and the system allowed us to give up to 100% discounts on items, defer payments indefinitely etc, the only thing I couldnt do was override the decision not to give credit but my boss could do that. Due to how difficult the system was to use a lot of new people made mistakes and rather than discounting the item by 10% they reduced the item to 10% etc. There was human decisions and so who you spoke to made a big difference, I did basic checks on sob stories and so the woman who's mother had "died last week" 6 times over 3 years didnt get more time to pay her bill from me but clearly the previous agents had just pushed it though despite the prior notes.

They then brought in a new system, training went down to 2 weeks and newly trained people got an extra £0.30 an hour over order line agents. The new system made all the decisions and so rather than being able to write an item off that I previously could instead I mark an item as damaged on delivery and the system may offer a 10% discount and if thats rejected it may offer a 15% discount or may require its return etc. The staff were paid less, no errors in discounts given and the customer would get the same answer whoever they speak to... a win, win, win for the business and certain benefits to customer