Failure to respond to KYC resulting in ‘Arrangement to Pay’

thecontrastdude2022

Hoenir said:

eskbanker said:

If your case is going to hinge on discrepancies between what you were told in writing and what was said verbally in phone calls, have you secured copies of those recordings?

Front line customer services operator is unlikely to be totally knowledgable.  Letters are fact. 

Understood, but why is an ‘Arrangement to Pay’ on my credit file a fair outcome when the account was fully up to date? Immediately when my account was closed this Arrangement to Pay was noted on my credit file. I have never paid less than payments due.

thecontrastdude2022

eskbanker said:

If your case is going to hinge on discrepancies between what you were told in writing and what was said verbally in phone calls, have you secured copies of those recordings?

Do Amex have to provide the recordings of my calls if I request them? 

I am struggling with why is an ‘Arrangement to Pay’ on my credit file a fair outcome when the account was fully up to date? Immediately when my account was closed this Arrangement to Pay was noted on my credit file. I have never paid less than payments due. 

eskbanker

thecontrastdude2022 said:

Hoenir said:

eskbanker said:

If your case is going to hinge on discrepancies between what you were told in writing and what was said verbally in phone calls, have you secured copies of those recordings?

Front line customer services operator is unlikely to be totally knowledgable.  Letters are fact. 

Understood, but why is an ‘Arrangement to Pay’ on my credit file a fair outcome when the account was fully up to date? Immediately when my account was closed this Arrangement to Pay was noted on my credit file. I have never paid less than payments due.

But you said that the closure letter referred to debt collectors, so it sounds like they were treating it as an outstanding debt at that point - are you able to share a redacted image or copy/paste of that letter?

born_again

thecontrastdude2022 said:

Hoenir said:

eskbanker said:

If your case is going to hinge on discrepancies between what you were told in writing and what was said verbally in phone calls, have you secured copies of those recordings?

Front line customer services operator is unlikely to be totally knowledgable.  Letters are fact. 

Understood, but why is an ‘Arrangement to Pay’ on my credit file a fair outcome when the account was fully up to date? Immediately when my account was closed this Arrangement to Pay was noted on my credit file. I have never paid less than payments due.

Credit file is a statement of fact.
As your account was closed, you are now in a Arrangement to Pay situation.

2nd rep should have never said "Felt" that is liable to see them in trouble. What staff feel is right or wrong is not for them to judge. They just have to advice customers on the process going forward. 

saajan_12

If Amex doesn't want to fully train its CS staff that's up to them, so yes agree there is some fault on Amex's part if they provided the incorrect information, vs say instructing staff to not comment. 

However if they also stated the opposite in a letter (eg if you don't pass KYC then the account is closed and may have xyz impact) then the natural implication of that is closed account = no credit being extended = arrangement to pay a debt if you don't pay off in full. 

If there was a contradiction, then its partly ALSO on you to question or double check, not just blindly go off the only information that suits what you want to do, ignoring the contradictions. 

DullGreyGuy

thecontrastdude2022 said:
however I would fundamentally disagree that it’s a minor element of misinformation from staff.

On phonecall 1 I was told to continue making payments to my account as normal and there would be no impact

phonecall 2 a member of staff told me she felt it shouldn’t have been transferred to a third party in the first place

Ultimately, I’ve taken them for their word on a call and am now left with an Arrangement to Pay on my credit file which has me in a position of not being able to get a mortgage. For something that was never a credit issue. Seems deeply unfair to me 

worth noting that as soon as I realised there was an impact on my credit file, I satisfied the account in full. Which I could have done at any time had Amex told me the implications properly on the phone

But what did the letter say? If the letters had already said it had to be paid in full immediately it can be seen to be disingenuous to then ask the call centre agent what will happen when you had it in writing already. My comment of it being "minor" was predicated on the content of the letter. If the letter was silent on the matter then the misinformation from the agent becomes more material as you had nothing else to go on. 

The Financial Ombudsman looks in the first instance of what actual losses you've sustained due to the mishandling of the situation. By the sounds of it that will be nothing. The second part is then effectively general damages for the non-financial losses suffered, namely the time and effort taken to deal with it, the impact on you etc. This will depend on the content of the letters as previously mentioned. 

Remember to include the outcome that you want, presumably this will be that he CRA is changed to remove the reference of an arrangement to pay. 

thecontrastdude2022

DullGreyGuy said:

thecontrastdude2022 said:
however I would fundamentally disagree that it’s a minor element of misinformation from staff.

On phonecall 1 I was told to continue making payments to my account as normal and there would be no impact

phonecall 2 a member of staff told me she felt it shouldn’t have been transferred to a third party in the first place

Ultimately, I’ve taken them for their word on a call and am now left with an Arrangement to Pay on my credit file which has me in a position of not being able to get a mortgage. For something that was never a credit issue. Seems deeply unfair to me 

worth noting that as soon as I realised there was an impact on my credit file, I satisfied the account in full. Which I could have done at any time had Amex told me the implications properly on the phone

But what did the letter say? If the letters had already said it had to be paid in full immediately it can be seen to be disingenuous to then ask the call centre agent what will happen when you had it in writing already. My comment of it being "minor" was predicated on the content of the letter. If the letter was silent on the matter then the misinformation from the agent becomes more material as you had nothing else to go on. 

The Financial Ombudsman looks in the first instance of what actual losses you've sustained due to the mishandling of the situation. By the sounds of it that will be nothing. The second part is then effectively general damages for the non-financial losses suffered, namely the time and effort taken to deal with it, the impact on you etc. This will depend on the content of the letters as previously mentioned. 

Remember to include the outcome that you want, presumably this will be that he CRA is changed to remove the reference of an arrangement to pay. 

I’d suggest it’s more disingenuous to create a credit issue for a customer who was never experiencing credit issues, was advised no impact to their file so long as they continued making payments, and then registering an Arrangement to Pay despite saying otherwise. I made payment in full the minute I seen an impact on my credit file - despite Amex saying it would not have any impact.

I called when I received the letter, nobody told me that payment in full was mandatory or face consequences, and I trusted a reputable brand I had been a customer of for 10 years.

sounds like from everyones feedback that an ‘Arrangement to Pay’ is the correct outcome and that whilst I can contest it, Amex don’t have to give accurate information on the call. 

impact is I can’t secure a mortgage, my credit file is impacted for 6 years for something that was never w credit issue and I had the facility to pay. Really poor outcome.

eskbanker

thecontrastdude2022 said:

I called when I received the letter, nobody told me that payment in full was mandatory or face consequences

Is it that you're unable to share the actual contents of the letter, or just unwilling to?

Hoenir

saajan_12 said:

If Amex doesn't want to fully train its CS staff that's up to them, so yes agree there is some fault on Amex's part if they provided the incorrect information, vs say instructing staff to not comment. 

As has been said maybe notional goodwill payment. We still don't know the precise wording of the letters.  Takes many years for people to be trained / gain experience. Everybody in a job starts somewhere.  Everybody makes mistakes at work. 

DullGreyGuy

thecontrastdude2022 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

thecontrastdude2022 said:
however I would fundamentally disagree that it’s a minor element of misinformation from staff.

On phonecall 1 I was told to continue making payments to my account as normal and there would be no impact

phonecall 2 a member of staff told me she felt it shouldn’t have been transferred to a third party in the first place

Ultimately, I’ve taken them for their word on a call and am now left with an Arrangement to Pay on my credit file which has me in a position of not being able to get a mortgage. For something that was never a credit issue. Seems deeply unfair to me 

worth noting that as soon as I realised there was an impact on my credit file, I satisfied the account in full. Which I could have done at any time had Amex told me the implications properly on the phone

But what did the letter say? If the letters had already said it had to be paid in full immediately it can be seen to be disingenuous to then ask the call centre agent what will happen when you had it in writing already. My comment of it being "minor" was predicated on the content of the letter. If the letter was silent on the matter then the misinformation from the agent becomes more material as you had nothing else to go on. 

The Financial Ombudsman looks in the first instance of what actual losses you've sustained due to the mishandling of the situation. By the sounds of it that will be nothing. The second part is then effectively general damages for the non-financial losses suffered, namely the time and effort taken to deal with it, the impact on you etc. This will depend on the content of the letters as previously mentioned. 

Remember to include the outcome that you want, presumably this will be that he CRA is changed to remove the reference of an arrangement to pay. 

I’d suggest it’s more disingenuous to create a credit issue for a customer who was never experiencing credit issues, was advised no impact to their file so long as they continued making payments, and then registering an Arrangement to Pay despite saying otherwise. I made payment in full the minute I seen an impact on my credit file - despite Amex saying it would not have any impact.

I called when I received the letter, nobody told me that payment in full was mandatory or face consequences, and I trusted a reputable brand I had been a customer of for 10 years.

sounds like from everyones feedback that an ‘Arrangement to Pay’ is the correct outcome and that whilst I can contest it, Amex don’t have to give accurate information on the call. 

impact is I can’t secure a mortgage, my credit file is impacted for 6 years for something that was never w credit issue and I had the facility to pay. Really poor outcome.

Can't speak for everyone else but personally, no, I am not saying it's the right outcome because the content of the letters haven't been shared. In the absence of them can only say it might be an appropriate outcome.

The snotty letters we got from HSBC on KYC were very clear that any lending would be repayable immediately if we "continued" to fail to provide evidence and they closed the account - we didnt even have any lending. Our situation was different though, we did provide the KYC information and they made a catalogue of errors processing it inc when looking at public records. We got £75 for the inconvenience of 14 phone calls with 4 of them being over 2 hours each.