Hello - yes I did. I wrote in telling them I was apalled and that it was discrimination and nothing else. I got a letter back saying that it just an administrative error - or that was the general gist - and that they were terribly sorry I felt that way and couldn't really understand why I would think that. Skating over the fact that without saying antyhing other than 'why was my repayment programme stopped' to Triton - they said - 'Have you made a complaint? That's why'. So that is how I came to that conclusion... it wasn't very difficult.

Anyway - I did eventually pick up the phone again as another months payment was due and I didn't want the whole thing escalting out of control. I was offered the chance to pay £270 ish a month instead of my £65. She then admitted she could see the repayment plan had been set up but hadn't been updated on the system correctly. And then after about 20 minutes of insisting that inspite of that I'd have to pay £270 a month she miraculously reset it and I now pay £65.

So that's a good result. And I got it confirmed in writing. I am still disputing my default for which they have no default paperwork although they are able to send me another 42 trees worth of statements which somehow they think is satisfying my request for a copy of the default notice. It is not.

We carry on spurred on by recent vicotories! If I can get this default removed, I will have a fabulous credit rating and the chance of a much better mortgage each month, allowing for even more kitchen units... see - there is a plan!

"Kitchin unit reward far from trivial!! Sink empties into a bucket at the moment... emptying said bucket into a drain (navigating obstacle course of worms and snails etc who seem almost seem to come out just to watch) on these cold wet and windy nights is not much fun so - every little most welcome :-)."

Fair enough. In my experience, as far as letter writing is concerned, sending something directly to the CEO's office (usually) means that somebody is assigned 'ownership' of that problem, and you only have one person to deal with.

But in these days of corporate irresponsibility, the customer is often no longer king!

Good luck with the plumbing.

Unfortunately I am a fan of the - let's just get it sorted with one phonecall and let that be the end of it - theory, rather than the 6 months & 42 trees worth of paper later, and certainly I probably wasted far more time trying to speak to the right person (and failing) than I would have done if I had started down this route right from the get go. Definitely a lesson learned.

It is completely strange that I never had closing statement - but easily explained because they obviously never closed the account! I had no idea that I should have received anything, so was oblivious to the fact it was missing. I know now.

I'd be interested to know if you think I would have got more had I had more records. Or if presumably it would not have got this far.

Kitchn unit reward far from trivial!! Sink empties into a bucket at the moment... emptying said bucket into a drain (navigating obstacle course of worms and snails etc who seem almost seem to come out just to watch) on these cold wet and windy nights is not much fun so - every little most welcome :-).

Jells Bells - as a matter of interest, did you get anywhere with the 2nd situation involving the strange handling of your loan account??(I'm a customer of NatWest as well!!)

An interesting story here.

What is very clear to me at least, is the extraordinary time you spent on the telephone, which of course means that you have no record of what transpired. You didn't even have a closing statement from the account that you closed - which strikes me as strange.

When I deal with anything related to banking, I do it by mail (recorded delivery if important) simply so that I retain a copy as a record. And always keep letters that you receive from the bank in all cases.

I think the "kitchen unit" reward is fairly trivial, but because you have no records (and Nat West are aware of this) the matter concludes.

I just thought I would update you all on the latest. Having taken the issues with my current account to the financial ombudsman in regard to possible compensation (but frankly more as a punishment) we have had a result. Instead of the 'we will remove the charges and default as a goodwill gesture' that I managed to get, they have managed to get an entirly different - it is all our fault and we did not handle our error well and we will offer you £200 (afer inital £50 offer).

Needless to say I've accepted. That's one more kitchen unit paid for - I might have a full cupboard with doors and everything soon...

Thanks for spurring me on! Was worth it in the end!

Jells Bells

If you don't get a satisfactory response from the NatWest manager, write to the person who dealt with your last head office complaint. They may have had a hand with this, so should explain the situation.

I have a feeling that they are trying to lose you as a customer, so may be willing to negotiate a small sum to write off your outstanding loan.

Huckster

Hi,
After months of fighting over my NatWest current account I have finally won the war and the default removed.
I moved on to trying to remove a default on my loan account - a bit of background:
I began to struggle to pay my loan account some years ago when my partner went into hospital and we had to survive on one salary for 18 months. I set up a repayment plan of £60 a month instead of the original amount which was £91. This was about 3 years ago.
Then one sunny day I discovered a default on my credit report for this loan which they had assured me would not happen and which they had applied a year later. I found out the reason was because they couldn't get hold of me to reset the payment plan (as is due 6 monthly) and so defaulted me. This was simply because I was not in the country for a few weeks but I never missed a payment, they continued to come out of my account on time every month as they always have. When I returned home I had a letter and called them straight away - we re-set the plan - there was no problem and I assumed all was well in the world of NatWest. I never had a default notice from them.
On discovering the default I have set about trying to get it removed by asking them to supply a copy of said default notice as I believe they are required to do. I sent several letters but only got a signed copy of the original credit agreement. Consequently after the last 28 days expired I took the matter to the financial ombudsman as I had said I would if they failed to comply.

I have today received a letter from NatWest stating that I am £749 in arrears. They have no record of a repayment plan in place and are perplexed when I mention the £60 (increased 2 months ago to £65) agreement I have in place through their Triton recoveries team. I have been on hold for 45 minutes whilst they 'investigate' and the results of said investigation were - I should be paying £91 and I have arrears of £749 - which is what it says in the letter which didn't take me 45 minutes to read. I can (as a special favour) make a one off payment of £749 today. Sounds like a great deal!!!

I also have in my possession a letter from Triton dated 16th June stating the agreed repayment plan for this correct loan account number for 6 months from the agreed date (1st July) for £65.

Following the 45 minute conversation with NatWest and their very cagey attitude, I phoned Triton. They informed me they are no longer dealing with the account and it has gone back to a branch level at their request. I asked him why and he trotted off and put me on hold for 10 minutes and came back with the telling question: 'have you made a complaint?'. To which I replied I had and he explained that was the reason the account was back with NatWest. I asked if this meant the repayment agreement was no longer valid and he replied that this was the case.

Where does one start with this? Well for starters I have had no correspondence saying I am no longer dealing with Triton. I have had no correspondence saying the plan is no longer valid. I have just got this ridiculous letter saying from NatWest stating I seem to have missed a payment (exact words) - as if one payment amounts to £749.
And that's before we even get to the fact I am now being discriminated against because I made a valid complaint. Surely they cannot end the repayment plan without any notice as punishment for me complaining??!!

I called NatWest back and asked to speak with a manager - if I am lucky I may get a call back today - but I said I wanted to confirm this was the case and if this was their standard procedure. The lady I spoke to raised no eyebrow.

In my last conversation with NatWest I stated to the very nice lady that I would not be making any further payments on this loan if a manager does not call me back within 24 hours and she had noted as such on my account.

So the very long background leads to these questions:
Because I have made a complaint to the financial ombudsman - can they end the repayment agreement with no notice despite having it in writing? And is being discriminated against like this common practice?
Can I refuse to make any further payments on this account until this is resolved, simply for the fact that they (not I), have defaulted the agreement .
Or is this simply NatWest's clever way of making sure I get a default even if I have the old one removed.....

And of course as ever - do you have any advice?

I am so sick of NatWest - every time I see their adverts on the telly with the little van that will bring your bank to you on the beach or the one promoting the wonders of Saturday banking which they and others have been doing for years, it makes me shout at the TV!

NatWest - helpful banking ...........

Jells Bells:

More updates... they wrote back with some haste saying they failed to see why any compensation was due. So I sent off a complainT to the finacial ombudsman. Whether I get anything or not they can pay their £450!

Hah, a convert. Welcome to the club.

Who used the word "compensation"? This is quite important. They may be right about that if you didn't lose money but not about your feelings. What you should ask for is an ex-gratia "distress and inconvenience" payment (D&I).

More updates... they wrote back with some haste saying they failed to see why any compensation was due. So I sent off a complainT to the finacial ombudsman. Whether I get anything or not they can pay their £450!

Jells Bells:

Just a quick update on this one... .I have had a response from the Chief Executives office (apparently) - here are the pertinent bits:

"Contrary to popular belief, cheques do not legally expire after 6 months. It is usual banking pratice to consider a cheque to be 'stale' after 6 months,

Yes that is a result of sorts and the way that NatWest/RBS try to admit being got without admitting it.

I think the explanation about the cheque is irrelevent. The phrase defined in the Banking Codes is "out-of-date cheque". The word "stale" does not appear in the banking codes. Whatever the legal status of an out-of-date cheque, it's the procedural status which is being challenged, and NatWest have conceded procedural error. Implicitly they have admitted contravention of the banking codes, procedurally a serious issue.

Up to you but what you have sufferred does merit an ex-gratia payment. I don't have the NatWest "tariff" on this. I accepted an unsolicited offer of £100 for arguably a more serious procedural failure so possibly £50 in your case. FYI, the Financial Ombudsman Service case fee that NatWest would have to pay if you don't accept is several hundred pounds so you decide how hard you want to play. I would just phone the letter author on the contact number given who certainly has authority for up to £100. The best argument is to explain that you have sufferred "distress and inconvenience". I guarantee the person you are speaking to understands the phrase and its significance. The point is that they then recognise and award "D&I" without concedeing error, possibly the best outcome all round.

Jells Bells

What you could do is, send a letter thanking them for their reply and the actions they have taken. But then ask why no comment has been made concerning the request for compensation.

Point out that you are keen for the FOS to look into the way in which NatWest has handled the account, in particular the lack of letters issued at the time the cheque was paid and the charges/default were applied. Advise that in view of the stress and inconvenience you have suffered, that you are seeking compensation of £xxx and will be asking the FOS to comment on this aspect.

NatWest will make a judgement about what information they have in their favour, how likely you will complain to the FOS and the £450 they will have pay if you go ahead with the complaint. NatWest and other companies rely on the fact that most customers go away happy that their complaint has been dealt with, very few come back for comp. If you write to them I would not be surprised if you received a cheque for £100, with letter advising that this payment is not any admission of any wrong action but as gesture of good will.

It is worth a go. When you look at the new RBS CEO's salary package of £9m over 5 years, £100 is a drop in the ocean!!

huckster.

Just a quick update on this one... .I have had a response from the Chief Executives office (apparently) - here are the pertinent bits:

"Contrary to popular belief, cheques do not legally expire after 6 months. It is usual banking pratice to consider a cheque to be 'stale' after 6 months, but if this represents a valid debtm the Bank has a contractual obligation to pay the item. The cheque was presented for payment on 23 Feb 2007 but this was returned unpaid., as there were insufficient funds in the account. An unpaid fee of £38 was charged and a letter was sent informing you fo this, however, because you had already had an outstanding debt registered with the Bank, this should not have been debited. I apologise for this error. In view of the problems you are already experiencing with your loan account, I would certainly not wish to add to the stress you have explained you are under. It is for this reason I have arranged for the account to be closed and the balance written off. I will also ensure that your credit reference file is updated and any record regarding your current account will be removed....."

So essentially a good result although it seems a bit odd and ignores the fact I had theoretically closed the account hence why no money and am not sure what the other debt registered means - possibly my loan although not sure what that has to do with it although am not certain I care too much.

One question though - no mention of compensation, should I press for this? Any thoughts on what tack to take? My original letter did mention it. Presumbly they think I am so grateful they have agreed to correct their error, that I will forget about it....

Jalexa

The fee the FOS charges banks/Insurers etc is apparently now £450. I suspect the Bank will be wanting to resolve this quickly for Jells Bells. When I had any involvement in complaints I was surprised at the number of times we paid the customer compensation, even when the customer had a weak/invalid complaint. Banks/Insurance companies have a problem with handling volumes of complaints and therefore sometimes they just pay off persistent complainants. They way up the cost of dealing with correspondence, the likelyhood of the customer going to the FOS and if it not worth it, they do what they know will be sufficient to get the customer off their backs.

The FOS is receiving record numbers of complaints and therefore it is no surprise that Financial Services companies want to change the fees system!!

Huckster

Jells Bells:

The 2005 Banking Code guidance notes is probably relevent...

Out-of-date cheque

A cheque which has not been paid because the date written on the cheque is too old (normally older than six months).

While it includes the weasel word "normally", if a bank wanted to depart from "normally" it would need to make any departure explicitly clear.

I think this is the perfect type of case for the Financial Ombudsman Service. They are experienced in asking for the bank to substantiate their claims and will make a judgement based on the balance of probability. To take this step you need to have complained formally and to remain dissatisfied after 8 weeks.

Huckster is right that once the complaint reaches head office customer relations it will be treated seriously. This is because the refererence to the FOS will cost you nothing but NatWest a hefty case fee regardless of the outcome well in excess of the cost of settling with you. You should expect all your costs and default removal demands to be met along with at least £100 compo.