Shawbrook Bank - Ignores undelivered maturity emails- assumes you've received them.

HUMBUG

gt94sss2 said:

Qyburn said:

It is a black mark against Shawbrook defaulting a matured fix into a special "punishment account" instead of into their current easy access account, like for example Virgin Money.  But that's shabby business practice, rather than a failing justifying a complaint.

Especially as it's made clear what will happen at maturity, when you open your fixed rate account

It's made clear in their T&C's that they will move your matured cash isas into some 'Matured Funds Cash ISA'  account but it won't stipulate the rate of 0.1%.  I wasn't aware of that 0.1% until I looked at the maturity documents that are sent a few weeks before maturity date.

TheBanker

HUMBUG said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

I've been reading through this thread and it does appear that the OP is desperately trying (and failing) to get someone on here to agree with him.  

I thought I'd put my 2 pennyworth in.  OP claims that because Shawbrook did not notify him, by letter because his email address did not work, that his account matured he missed out on a substantial amount of interest.

So.........

Shawbrook

1. Failed to send a letter, although did send an email and put the messages online.

Humbug

1. Failed to take note of when his account was due to mature.
2. Failed to update his contact email address even though it changed 5 months previously
3. Failed to login to his account for at least 5 months and maybe longer

I can't see how the FoS will find in his favour when he contributed to the failure significantly more than Shawbrook.  I wonder if I can find somewhere to place a bet....hahaha

1. There isn't any  'notify by letter' because I don't have a postal account.
2. I did note down the maturity date on my spreadsheet , and I usually highlight in red those that are approaching maturity.  I just made a mistake and didn't spot the ones for Shawbrook  (my bad!!!).
3. I've already said that the email I used when I created my profile 10 years ago was my Plusnet webmail which I haven't accessed for many years. It was a useless webmail and I used a tool that made a copy of every email it received to send to my gmail account. Therefore, after 15 years not having to log into my Plusnet webmail , I'd actually forgotten it existed . Shawbrook emails after 15 years just seemed (to me anyhow) to be sent direct to my gmail,  so I just forgot that the old Plusnet webmail was still linked in my 'Profile'. 
4. When I moved broadband from Plusnet to EE , my Plusnet webmail was closed down , so I didn't receive Shawbrook email copies sent from Plusnet webmail to my gmail. 
5. I don't log into accounts while they are all 1 year fixed , why should I?  There is no change to the amounts until maturity when the interest is added.  The only time I log into accounts is approaching maturity or to get a tax certificate and I certainly don't check the 'My Profile' details every time I log on (do you?).

If you want to place a bet , I think the odds-on favourite is Shawbrook because it seems very rare that FOS favours the customer , especially from the sample cases they publish for public viewing.

One things for sure , when my current cash isa matures next year , I won't be renewing it with Shawbrook , mainly because of their blatant profiteering using a 0.1% interest holding account for matured isas.

The cases published by FOS are not a 'sample' - they publish all final decisions i.e. cases which have been referred to an Ombudsman. They don't publish cases which were resolved at the adjudicator stage because these are not formal decisions.

Having been involved in handling FOS complaints for banks, their general view is that they generally do favour the customer. But the reality is every case will leave one party feeling hard done to.

It's important to remember that the FOS was set up to resolve complaints in a less formal way than the courts. They won't focus exclusively on one line in the T&Cs, they will look at the situation as a whole to decide what they think is a fair outcome for both parties. In this case they will certainly consider the line in the T&Cs you've highlighted, but they will also consider the line that Shawbrook have highlighted. And the question they will have to answer is whether it is fair and reasonable for Shawbrook to bear the full 'loss' arising from this situation when it was of your own making (by forgetting to tell them you'd changed email address, and by forgetting when your account matured).

Shawbrook may well look at the details you provided when you last opened an account or renewed a deposit. They may well have asked you to confirm your contact details as part of this, and question why you confirmed an email address that you say you had forgotten existed.

Personally, I think the real issue is the practice of maturing accounts into a 0.1% easy access account, when there is an almost identical easy access account on sale paying a higher interest rate. My instinct is that this could be a problem when considering the FCA's Consumer Duty rules - but I am not an expert in these. If you are making a complaint this should form part of it though as I personally feel it's something the FOS are more likely to look at than whether they should have sent SMS messages because you failed to give the correct email address. FOS may well say it's a commercial decision, and depending on the dates your products matured the Consumer Duty rules may not even be relevent. But I think your efforts would be better spent researching this point than contacting a bunch of random banks asking how they deal with email bouncebacks - when you have no evidence that Shawbrook actually received a bounceback from your fomer email provider. 

MeteredOut

HUMBUG said:

I've received the final letter from Shawbrook and they claim no fault on their side. They use the T&C's clause 6.1 and I am using clause 6.3 to counter.  I can't see the logic in them saying they will send SMS text messages (when there is a document to be read online)  when they patently don't seem to have that facility operating.

I have mentioned a contradiction between 2  different people I've talked to on the phone. One said they do act with due diligence to contact customers by SMS text message (not post) when they receive undeliverable email , while the other said they don't monitor undeliverable email. 

Then we have an apparent contradiction in clause 6.1 and 6.3 so I think its up to the FOS.  

But yes , I've seen several FOS example cases where most of the time they don't uphold customer disputes and favour the organisations. But as 'Section 62'  posted ,  'I might struck lucky'  depending on the case handler.

Here's a 2nd reply I received from the 9  banks I contacted about email undeliverable processes . So that's 2 that confirm that they would try and contact the customer by alternative channels.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your message, 

When we receive a bounce back email, we generally try to contact the customer by call to confirm the new or correct email address, 

We will also sent a letter to your address giving you the opportunity to provide your email address with space for your signature underneath,

Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any further queries,

------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

That does not confirm much. "When we receive a bounce back email". ie, if they do not, they won't do anything. 

Have Shawbrook confirmed (one way or the other) if they did receive a bounce back email from your old email address?

And I still don't see what other unconnected institutions state they do (which may be different from what they actually do) does to forward your case.

Section62

HUMBUG said:

...
One things for sure , when my current cash isa matures next year , I won't be renewing it with Shawbrook , mainly because of their blatant profiteering using a 0.1% interest holding account for matured isas.

Taking a moral stand and avoiding a provider whose practices you don't like is absolutely fine.

But bear in mind the higher fixed term rates you've benefitted from in the past are quite likely to have been enabled by them structuring their product range in the way they have.  By paying a low rate on easy access cash which may be withdrawn at any time (and which they may have no use for in their business model) they have probably been able to deploy the income from this "blatant profiteering" (as you put it) into paying higher fixed rates.

With most providers paying the highest rates there is usually a downside.  Dumping you onto a low interest rate at the end of a fixed-term is a common one, and widely practiced (even by the paragon of virtue, Nationwide BS).  If you are taking a moral stand then do make sure to research any other provider you opt for to make sure they aren't up to anything equally distasteful.

They probably are.

MeteredOut

Section62 said:

HUMBUG said:

...
One things for sure , when my current cash isa matures next year , I won't be renewing it with Shawbrook , mainly because of their blatant profiteering using a 0.1% interest holding account for matured isas.

Taking a moral stand and avoiding a provider whose practices you don't like is absolutely fine.

But bear in mind the higher fixed term rates you've benefitted from in the past are quite likely to have been enabled by them structuring their product range in the way they have.  By paying a low rate on easy access cash which may be withdrawn at any time (and which they may have no use for in their business model) they have probably been able to deploy the income from this "blatant profiteering" (as you put it) into paying higher fixed rates.

With most providers paying the highest rates there is usually a downside.  Dumping you onto a low interest rate at the end of a fixed-term is a common one, and widely practiced (even by the paragon of virtue, Nationwide BS).  If you are taking a moral stand then do make sure to research any other provider you opt for to make sure they aren't up to anything equally distasteful.

They probably are.

I think this point is worth re-iterating. Those of us who benefit from higher rates do so PRECISELY because there are people like the OP who are not always on top of managing their finances. If everyone went after the higher rates, we'd all be getting 1.5-2.5% interest at present.

So I, for one, celebrate people not updating their email addresses

dunstonh

If you want to place a bet , I think the odds-on favourite is Shawbrook because it seems very rare that FOS favours the customer , especially from the sample cases they publish for public viewing.

The FOS is an independent arbiter of complaints.   Financial firms generally feel the FOS is more consumer-friendly than firm-friendly.    It certainly is more consumer-friendly than the courts.

All decisions made by an ombudsman are published.  It's not a sample.   Adjudicator/investigator decisions are not.   

You can never predict a FOS outcome, but looking at the complaint, you would guess that the FOS would not uphold it as the fault lies with the consumer.     Generally, when a consumer fails to notify the firm of their new contact details, the FOS usually rejects the complaint and points to the fact it is the responsibility of the consumer to keep firms up-to-date with their contact details.

In respect of acting on bounced emails, it is worth noting that not all closed email providers bounce emails.    Sometimes, bounced email responses are challenging to understand as they are full of code.   Sometimes, spam filters will factor out bounced email responses.

Nighthawkfly

Thirteen Pages of comments 🤷‍♀️. I suggest maybe as much attention to detail in keeping personal records up to date may be prudent.

The OP does seem "well versed" in the path of pursuising such matters however.

HUMBUG

TheBanker said:

HUMBUG said:

GrubbyGirl_2 said:

I've been reading through this thread and it does appear that the OP is desperately trying (and failing) to get someone on here to agree with him.  

I thought I'd put my 2 pennyworth in.  OP claims that because Shawbrook did not notify him, by letter because his email address did not work, that his account matured he missed out on a substantial amount of interest.

So.........

Shawbrook

1. Failed to send a letter, although did send an email and put the messages online.

Humbug

1. Failed to take note of when his account was due to mature.
2. Failed to update his contact email address even though it changed 5 months previously
3. Failed to login to his account for at least 5 months and maybe longer

I can't see how the FoS will find in his favour when he contributed to the failure significantly more than Shawbrook.  I wonder if I can find somewhere to place a bet....hahaha

1. There isn't any  'notify by letter' because I don't have a postal account.
2. I did note down the maturity date on my spreadsheet , and I usually highlight in red those that are approaching maturity.  I just made a mistake and didn't spot the ones for Shawbrook  (my bad!!!).
3. I've already said that the email I used when I created my profile 10 years ago was my Plusnet webmail which I haven't accessed for many years. It was a useless webmail and I used a tool that made a copy of every email it received to send to my gmail account. Therefore, after 15 years not having to log into my Plusnet webmail , I'd actually forgotten it existed . Shawbrook emails after 15 years just seemed (to me anyhow) to be sent direct to my gmail,  so I just forgot that the old Plusnet webmail was still linked in my 'Profile'. 
4. When I moved broadband from Plusnet to EE , my Plusnet webmail was closed down , so I didn't receive Shawbrook email copies sent from Plusnet webmail to my gmail. 
5. I don't log into accounts while they are all 1 year fixed , why should I?  There is no change to the amounts until maturity when the interest is added.  The only time I log into accounts is approaching maturity or to get a tax certificate and I certainly don't check the 'My Profile' details every time I log on (do you?).

If you want to place a bet , I think the odds-on favourite is Shawbrook because it seems very rare that FOS favours the customer , especially from the sample cases they publish for public viewing.

One things for sure , when my current cash isa matures next year , I won't be renewing it with Shawbrook , mainly because of their blatant profiteering using a 0.1% interest holding account for matured isas.

The cases published by FOS are not a 'sample' - they publish all final decisions i.e. cases which have been referred to an Ombudsman. They don't publish cases which were resolved at the adjudicator stage because these are not formal decisions.

Having been involved in handling FOS complaints for banks, their general view is that they generally do favour the customer. But the reality is every case will leave one party feeling hard done to.

It's important to remember that the FOS was set up to resolve complaints in a less formal way than the courts. They won't focus exclusively on one line in the T&Cs, they will look at the situation as a whole to decide what they think is a fair outcome for both parties. In this case they will certainly consider the line in the T&Cs you've highlighted, but they will also consider the line that Shawbrook have highlighted. And the question they will have to answer is whether it is fair and reasonable for Shawbrook to bear the full 'loss' arising from this situation when it was of your own making (by forgetting to tell them you'd changed email address, and by forgetting when your account matured).

Shawbrook may well look at the details you provided when you last opened an account or renewed a deposit. They may well have asked you to confirm your contact details as part of this, and question why you confirmed an email address that you say you had forgotten existed.

Personally, I think the real issue is the practice of maturing accounts into a 0.1% easy access account, when there is an almost identical easy access account on sale paying a higher interest rate. My instinct is that this could be a problem when considering the FCA's Consumer Duty rules - but I am not an expert in these. If you are making a complaint this should form part of it though as I personally feel it's something the FOS are more likely to look at than whether they should have sent SMS messages because you failed to give the correct email address. FOS may well say it's a commercial decision, and depending on the dates your products matured the Consumer Duty rules may not even be relevent. But I think your efforts would be better spent researching this point than contacting a bunch of random banks asking how they deal with email bouncebacks - when you have no evidence that Shawbrook actually received a bounceback from your fomer email provider. 

Interesting post regarding FOS as I've only searched for cases involving Shawbrook, where the ones I've read  most customer disputes were not upheld.

Many thanks with regards FCA Consumer Duties  as it's the first time I've ever heard about this.  I have found this link below which I may refer to in my FOS letter.

https://www.fca.org.uk/publications/multi-firm-reviews/fca-update-cash-savings-september-2024

The maturity letters were created in Dec 24 and Jan 25  , after the date of the above publication. They state that if no reply, the funds would be transferred to this 'Matured Cash Isa Account' at 0.1%.

I do have some evidence that Shawbrook would have received a bounceback email.  I contacted Plusnet and asked them what would have happened to an email sent to my closed webmail and they have stated the following:

-----------------------------------------------

Greetings from Plusnet
If e-mails were sent to your mailbox after it closed, the emails sent to it will typically be rejected as undeliverable. This is because your email address is no longer valid, and the email system won't be able to find your mail server to deliver the message.
Kind regards,
-----------------------------------------------

My letter to FOS is getting longer and longer.

HUMBUG

MeteredOut said:

HUMBUG said:

I've received the final letter from Shawbrook and they claim no fault on their side. They use the T&C's clause 6.1 and I am using clause 6.3 to counter.  I can't see the logic in them saying they will send SMS text messages (when there is a document to be read online)  when they patently don't seem to have that facility operating.

I have mentioned a contradiction between 2  different people I've talked to on the phone. One said they do act with due diligence to contact customers by SMS text message (not post) when they receive undeliverable email , while the other said they don't monitor undeliverable email. 

Then we have an apparent contradiction in clause 6.1 and 6.3 so I think its up to the FOS.  

But yes , I've seen several FOS example cases where most of the time they don't uphold customer disputes and favour the organisations. But as 'Section 62'  posted ,  'I might struck lucky'  depending on the case handler.

Here's a 2nd reply I received from the 9  banks I contacted about email undeliverable processes . So that's 2 that confirm that they would try and contact the customer by alternative channels.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your message, 

When we receive a bounce back email, we generally try to contact the customer by call to confirm the new or correct email address, 

We will also sent a letter to your address giving you the opportunity to provide your email address with space for your signature underneath,

Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any further queries,

------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

That does not confirm much. "When we receive a bounce back email". ie, if they do not, they won't do anything. 

Have Shawbrook confirmed (one way or the other) if they did receive a bounce back email from your old email address?

And I still don't see what other unconnected institutions state they do (which may be different from what they actually do) does to forward your case.

The customer service rep said they didn't , but if they did they would act with due diligence and send an SMS text.

The 2nd Tier Complaints team said they do not monitor for bounced emails.

So how can Shawbrook act with due diligence on bounced emails when they do not have a process to monitor them?

HUMBUG

MeteredOut said:

Section62 said:

HUMBUG said:

...
One things for sure , when my current cash isa matures next year , I won't be renewing it with Shawbrook , mainly because of their blatant profiteering using a 0.1% interest holding account for matured isas.

Taking a moral stand and avoiding a provider whose practices you don't like is absolutely fine.

But bear in mind the higher fixed term rates you've benefitted from in the past are quite likely to have been enabled by them structuring their product range in the way they have.  By paying a low rate on easy access cash which may be withdrawn at any time (and which they may have no use for in their business model) they have probably been able to deploy the income from this "blatant profiteering" (as you put it) into paying higher fixed rates.

With most providers paying the highest rates there is usually a downside.  Dumping you onto a low interest rate at the end of a fixed-term is a common one, and widely practiced (even by the paragon of virtue, Nationwide BS).  If you are taking a moral stand then do make sure to research any other provider you opt for to make sure they aren't up to anything equally distasteful.

They probably are.

I think this point is worth re-iterating. Those of us who benefit from higher rates do so PRECISELY because there are people like the OP who are not always on top of managing their finances. If everyone went after the higher rates, we'd all be getting 1.5-2.5% interest at present.

So I, for one, celebrate people not updating their email addresses

One day it might happen to you, it's almost guaranteed you will make a mistake . This is the first expensive oversight I've made in 36 years, but age has a lot to do with it (my eyesight and hearing are failing), but  'every cloud has a silver lining' , because at least it's made you happy.