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

MeteredOut

HUMBUG said:

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?

I'll repeat what i said previously. Anyone you're speaking to at Shawbrook will not know the answer to your question unless it is in their training manual. The fact you've received two contradictory answers suggests its not in their training manual, so they'll have done what most low-paid call handlers do - tell you something that sounds believable in order to get you off the phone.

And Plusnet saying they send a bounce-back email does not mean that Shawbrook will have received it. Shawbrook's ISP-provided email server may well be configured (by someone in the distant past) to simply ignore bounce back emails. So, I do not believe Plusnet's email gives you any evidence that they would have received the bounce-back or be aware that your email address was out of date.

MeteredOut

HUMBUG said:

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.

 

I have made mistakes that have cost me financially, but accept those and move on.

eskbanker

HUMBUG said:

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.

FOS publishes firm-specific statistical analysis on a bi-annual basis, the most recent of which shows that the uphold rate for banking and credit complaints for Shawbrook is 15%, versus an industry average of 34%:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/data-insight/our-insight/half-yearly-complaints-data-h1-2024

IanManc

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.

Finally you admit that it is your mistake.

So now you can stop hassling Shawbrook and you needn't bother wasting the time of the FOS with your pointless spurious complaint.

Happy days. 

jimjames

HUMBUG said:

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.

Long thread but you mentioned earlier the 3 steps you take for products. Except in this case you seem to have missed all 3 steps so I really don't think it's fair to blame the bank that your admin failed on this occasion. Missing an email is one thing but then not seeing diary entries to remind you of the maturity is nothing to do with them. Time to move on in my view.

Section62

HUMBUG said:

....
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,

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

Not sure "rejected as undeliverable" means a bounceback message would have been sent.  In any event, "typically" gives Shawbrook a potential get out of jail card as "typically" can mean 'usually, but not necessarily always'.

So even if "rejected as undeliverable" does mean a bounceback might be sent, you can't prove it was in this case.

HUMBUG

IanManc said:

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.

Finally you admit that it is your mistake.

So now you can stop hassling Shawbrook and you needn't bother wasting the time of the FOS with your pointless spurious complaint.

Happy days. 

Ahh -  I love it when the shills come out to play.

Look at post 
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81405581/#Comment_81405581 

That's where I first admitted the mistake . It was quite early in the thread but you probably didn't read it.

HUMBUG

jimjames said:

HUMBUG said:

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.

Long thread but you mentioned earlier the 3 steps you take for products. Except in this case you seem to have missed all 3 steps so I really don't think it's fair to blame the bank that your admin failed on this occasion. Missing an email is one thing but then not seeing diary entries to remind you of the maturity is nothing to do with them. Time to move on in my view.

I disagree.

HUMBUG

Section62 said:

HUMBUG said:

....
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,

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

Not sure "rejected as undeliverable" means a bounceback message would have been sent.  In any event, "typically" gives Shawbrook a potential get out of jail card as "typically" can mean 'usually, but not necessarily always'.

So even if "rejected as undeliverable" does mean a bounceback might be sent, you can't prove it was in this case.

When I send an email to my old plusnet webmail I get a return email saying  'Address Not Found' . Wouldn't Shawbrook get the same type of reply?

Address not found

Your message wasn't delivered to xxxxx @broadplus.plus.com because the domain broadplus.plus.com couldn't be found. Check for typos or unnecessary spaces and try again. It doesn't matter anyway because they've admitted they don't monitor any automated emails they send out to customers.

booneruk

HUMBUG said:

When I send an email to my old plusnet webmail I get a return email saying  'Address Not Found' . Wouldn't Shawbrook get the same type of reply?

Address not found

Your message wasn't delivered to xxxxx @broadplus.plus.com because the domain broadplus.plus.com couldn't be found. Check for typos or unnecessary spaces and try again.

No.

Please let go of this bounced email thing, it's not reliable in any way.

You have an email server your outbound emails go through. You send an email by handing it off to your outbound email server. It tries to deliver to plusnet (1), plusnet says "no one here" (2) and your outbound email server happens to be configured to tell you about it (3)

Shawbrook's outbound email server could go "oh, ok. nothing more to do here" at stage 2. If so there'll be no indication at Shawbrook that the email did not make it to the intended recipient.

This is just one mechanism where 550 codes (email rejections) may not result in a 'message could not be delivered' email relayed to the sender. There will be others too.