Kent Reliance - is this ethical?

Fingerbobs

I'm no legal expert by any means, but isn't that an "unfair term"?

It certainly meets my definition of "unfair", but whether it would be upheld as legally "unfair" I have no idea.

DRS1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82087082#Comment_82087082

Did you go through Kent Reliance's complaints process first? What did they say?

dunstonh

Is introducing a new service a valid reason to change a fundamental facility of the account?

The point I've made on the thread is that future contributions would probably not be considered a fundamental facility on the account. There are long histories of products being soft closed for new money.

if so, where is the line drawn? Could they also reduce the interest rate with that excuse? Add a monthly fee?

Reducing the interest rate would be very hard for them to justify under any circumstance. Adding a monthly fee would be hard to justify on a short-term tie-in. Let's say either of those was put forward by them, they would have no choice but to let you exit without cost if they did it. However, I doubt they would because I don't think they would get away with it. Not only that, I don't think they'd even try it. Broadly speaking, firms know what they can and can't get away with.

I'm no legal expert by any means, but isn't that an "unfair term"?

To be honest, nobody knows until it's tested in court or the FCA itself takes a stance on it.

The reality is, who's gonna take them to court over it?

rallycurve

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82087160#Comment_82087160

Yes, I did. They acknowledged that "the removal of the ability to make further subscriptions to an existing Fixed Rate ISA following migration may cause inconvenience and disappointment" but said they are unable to make exceptions, retain accounts on the legacy platform or waive early access charges. They paid me a small compensation amount that isn't even a 5% of what I'd have to pay them if I wish to oppose to the changes and transfer out

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82087260#Comment_82087260

Obviously when they say they're unable to do any of those things, what they actually mean is that they're unwilling to, a significant difference!

rallycurve

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82087268#Comment_82087268

Indeed. In fact another forumite said they were offered to leave penalty free:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82074978#Comment_82074978

So they are able to make exceptions and waive early access charges

DRS1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82087260#Comment_82087260

Payments for distress and inconvenience aren't usually that much money.

Keeping the old system going doesn't seem realistic. But they could at least keep you on that system until it is finally decommissioned to give you as much time as possible to continue adding to the account.

I suppose you can see their logic in not waiving any charges for a transfer out considering your complaint is that you are being stopped from adding to the account.

rallycurve

Yes I see that. But having this facility is the reason I have this account and if I can't add into it, I'd rather move my money elsewhere. I might have accepted to fix my money at a lower rate to guarantee a potential better rate in the future and this change makes it pointless.

But I should not need to justify this. If they change the terms and conditions of the account and make it worse, they should allow me to exit without a penalty. They should not be allowed to unilaterally change anything

masonic

At the risk of asking the obvious…

If the account is paying a market leading rate, why would you wish to transfer existing funds away when you can simply open a better paying ISA and use that for new funds?

If the account is not paying a market leading rate, why would you want to throw good money after bad? In this case I can see the attraction of wanting to get a penalty free exit, so is this an opportunistic stance? If so, I get it.

Fingerbobs

After reading this thread, I've decided to withdraw all my money and close all my accounts with Kent Reliance.

If they can do something like this, then I can't trust them not to screw me over in other ways. I don't want any further dealings with them.