Phil Castle - We have taken a complaint to the FOS
12:37 | 03 Nov 2009
because Barclays Stcokbrokers hid behind the data protection act when we were tyring to tell them that an ISA transfer had been rejected and they needed to CLEARLY explain to the client why they were saying he had no cash or stocks in it. It took months to reolve and transpired he'd given an historic account number for his sharesaves which they had also had. We had recordings of them saying they could find nothing etc and despite teh fact teh client lost about £5,000, they offered £50 for their admin errors only and currently the FOS look likely to reject his complaint (despite teh fact the recordings show clear adminsitrative problems between different departments in Barclays)
If my client has to take it to court, I suspect he would win as there has been negligence in our opinion, contributory due to him quoting the wrong account number, but still negligence, but the FOS's answer is they are not interested in the potential legal outcome just in what is their "opinion" based on the facts they have looked at (they haven't requested or listened to the clients discussions with Barclays, which they confirm WAS recorded), so how can they get a balanced opinion?
It occurs to me the whole F-pack system is skewed to the big firms and if I had the choice I'd have nothing to do with the F-pack.... as none of them appear accountable if they are found wrong.
Barclays - Complaint Handling
12:41 | 03 Nov 2009
A 15-16 week backlog is standard. Some ‘investment management’ complaints date back to February!! FSA aren’t too bothered about this apparantly......
Philip Wise
13:01 | 03 Nov 2009
I'm sure that this is just the result of the way that big businesses work nowadays. Its not just banks.
Call centre staff are rewarded by the number of calls they handle, without regard to the quality, so its much more rewarding to say "no" quickly than to actually help a customer.
The management of the company then collate the data on the number of calls that have been dealt with and they get the impression, which they then pass on to the FSA etc that they are doing a good job. This is exacerbated when the admin is outsourced.
Its only when there are loads of complaints made that it registers with FSA (like it did eventually with Windsor), but its usually worth the company using the delaying tactics - just think how much they keep in fund management and other charges - definitely worth it, compared to a tap on the wrist from FSA.
Some financial services companies have developed this into an art. Is it just us, or does the Scottish Provident bit of Phoenix tell every IFA that the signature on the authority letter doesnt match the one they have, so they then request evidence of identity before any info can be released? So, this means that they keep the money for another few weeks whilst all of this is organised. NPI used to do a similar thing, always "accidentally" sending out the wrong transfer discharge form. Threadneedle used to have a similar system, where they would prevent withdrawals by re-requesting evidence of identity each time a client wanted money, but they seem to have dropped this in favour of customer service recently.
DB
12:26 | 04 Nov 2009
Barclays is, in my opinion opinion, the best example of what is rotten about the present British banking system. Arrogantly complacent management working in the knoweledge that regulatory capture is on the minds of senior FSA decision makers looking for their next senior banking role, thus very unlikley to rock the boat at thier next prospective employer.
TCF does not appear to apply to the banks.
Aidan - I have given up trying to phone my bank
12:44 | 04 Nov 2009
As I can never pass the security questions. Perhaps this is the idea to stop us calling the banks and only use online systems.
Charles Dickson
17:47 | 04 Nov 2009
It's not just the Banks, everyone's at it. Data Protection is a heaven sent opportunity for everyone to be as obstructive as they can be.
Having said that the most ridiculous example that happened to me was when my Bank rang me unsolictited on a Saturday morning witholding their number and said that they wished to speak to me about my account but before doing so could I answer some identifying questions. When I told them that I had no intention of divulging my details to an unsolicited call from a person purporting to be from my Bank, and before I would do so could she please identify herself to me, she got quite snotty and said that if I was not willing to identify myself she could not discuss my account further which was fine by me.
It did not occur to her that what she and the Bank were doing could have been phishing, but obvioulsy the powers that be in the Bank were too stupid to realise this. In the event snail mail came to the rescue as the Bank wrote to me on the subject later.
Phil Castle - Charles D - I had exactly the same thing
18:50 | 04 Nov 2009
with MBNA I think it was. I explaiend to them they had phoend me unsolicited and asked me for personal info when I didn't know them from adam. I was pretty sure it was them, but as you did, this is NOT the point, these companies just do not have a brain cell to share between them and appear totally unable to apply common sense and put themselves in either the ccustomer or frausters shoes!
Idiots....
Harry Katz
20:09 | 04 Nov 2009
Ah! You have all evidently overlooked the collective noun for bankers.
For those of you who didn't know it is:
A WUNCH of Bankers.
Anyway I always think the most effective form of criticism is ridicule, so Mr Editor what about a collection of the best Banker jokes? It might even cheer us all up!
Alex - did you hear about all the trouble Japanese banks are having?
16:50 | 05 Nov 2009
In the last 7 Days Origami Bank has folded, Sumo Bank has gone belly up and Bonsai Bank announced plans to cut some of its branches. Yesterday it was announced that Karaoke Bank is up for sale and will likely go for a song, while today shares in Kamikaze Bank were suspended after they nose-dived and 500 staff at Karate Bank got the chop. Analysts report that there is something fishy going on at Sushi Bank and staff feel they could get a raw deal
Harry Katz - Alex`
17:29 | 06 Nov 2009
Brilliant!
Dennis Hall - TLA Confusion
11:05 | 07 Nov 2009
We suffer from too many TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) RDR, TCF, DPA etc.
Yvonne asked whether RDR covered the application of common-sense, which is a perfectly valid question, but not in the context of the problem faced by her mother.
In this case the bank were hiding behind the DPA (data protection act) requirements. This is another area where commonsense doesn't always apply when firms try to implement its provisions.
I suppose that this might have a cross over into TCF, though I'm not completely convinced about this, after all the problem was remedied when they went to the branch and produced physical evidence of the account etc.
Whilst we can point the finger at the bank in this and similar cases, the fault actually lies with the criminal element that resides within society. As draconian as it may seem, the banks may have been right not to agree to sending a statement to the address.
It is possibloe for example that an acount holder may have asked for statements to be suspended because of a long absence from home, and an instruction for these to resume could come from someone else. As ridiculous and far fetched as it sounds, (as well as inconvenient) the banks on this occasion were more right than they were wrong. In my opinion of course.