When I went on holiday to The Philippines I used the Martin Lewis (Moneysaving Expert) website to compare rates for money. The best deal was Nat West. So I bought the Pesos. When I went to take the money we hadn’t spent to be changed, the assistant told me that they couldn’t exchange without charging commission. Really? Not what it says on the website. Tut tut that would be a breach of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 then. (When you enter an agreement on the basis of a statement purporting to be a fact but which turns out to be untrue, you have the right to cancel the deal and get your money back or to compensation). You can also do this under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations. Nat West staff wouldn’t have it though. Nor when I went back again to see someone senior!
So, obviously I did not pay the commission! I wrote. I pointed out the error of their ways. Namely that they stated no commission fees on the website and that I would be informing Martin Lewis so that they could take Nat West off the site. I expected redress for having to make another journey, parking costs, time wasted on this matter and the inconvenience.
Think that worried them! They wrote acknowledging the mistakes and asking me to ‘phone them to discuss the matter. I don’t do that. Write not phone for many a reason. So I wrote again. I made it clear that I would not be wasting any more time discussing the matter all the details were in the letter and suggested they ensured that when I took the money back that staff were properly informed and that I received adequate redress. Two trips and three letters I’ll have good redress thank you. My time is precious you know!
Nat West gave me £250. The amount I was exchanging was less than £100! However, the amount reflected their concerns about my informing Martin Lewis methinks! That or they realised too that my time is precious!?
Never ever just give in to bad service. If they say no commission for exchanging money ensure that they keep to the promise. They are breaking the Law if they don’t. It’s because people can’t be bothered to complain and take the time to write a letter that bad practice continues.
Halifax Halifax Halifax. I have a choice of 3 complaints to do here. Actually 4 if you count the one I did for a friend and got her £500. Now which one today? Toss of a coin (yes 3 times don’t try and get clever with me you know it aint gonna work). Let’s take the most recent one.
I changed my name. Yes ha ha ha ha haha to all those companies to whom I haven’t yet complained who think they have my name. You don’t and you don’t know to what I changed it ner ner ner ner ner! (Slightly unnecessarily childish particularly given that I have just tweeted “How childish can politicians get? Seriously. “I win I got my Royal Charter” “I win I got my Law” Grow up & do what’s best 4 ppl!” But hey ho moving on).
So, got the Deed certificate, paid for legal copies as some financial institutions needed them and others were happy with copies. Sent off details to Halifax and asked a simple question about fees on their card. You’d think that would be quite simple wouldn’t you, well obviously not or I wouldn’t be writing about it would I?!
The Halifax correspondence
I got a letter back addressed using my former name, not enclosing my document and not answering the question, but enclosing a new direct debit form! Fail on 3 counts! Rude huh? So I complained. Obviously.
I got a letter back offering me £30. Now, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again if you don’t think that the amount reflects the inconvenience or time spent on the matter, particularly when they don’t apologise or explain the issues…. complain again. So I did. I was particularly pedantic actually.
I pointed out the following to Ms R:
She said Halifax disposed of the document because it was a copy. (Oh yes Dear Reader did I not mention that earlier? Halifax destroyed the legal copy that I PAID for!) It was not a photocopy. It was a “Certified legal copy of a Deed of Change of Name (Deed Poll)”. I expected to be reimbursed!
She requested that I send my deed poll to the same address as before. Given that this was the address at which I had my property destroyed I refused to do that again and enclosed another legal copy to her and trusted that she would at least not destroy it and return it!
I received no explanation why, when my property was destroyed, no-one wrote to me to ask for (actually another) the deed poll. Had I not complained I could have continued to wait for both my deed poll to be returned and to receive my new credit card!
She completely ignored by question about the Card and I asked for a third time and failed to explain or apologise for why I only received a direct debit form and covering letter which ignored the two out of three points of my letter. I found this extremely rude and unacceptable.
Now here’s the particularly pedantic part. I wrote “I quote from your letter “I can see that we’ve let you down with some of the points you’ve raised. However I hope I’ve explained that there are some instances where I believe our actions were necessary.” This would indicate that you believe, as you have written in the plural, that at least two of your actions were necessary and acceptable. Please explain which these actions are. Destroying property which does not belong to Halifax and I had to pay for, not writing to me regarding this, ignoring my query about the credit card and writing to me in my former name are my list of complaints (to which I have added today). I do not believe that any of these actions (or non action!) were necessary, some were just downright rude. Please do explain which two you deem as necessary as I am very interested and it is these that I shall highlight to the Financial Ombudsman in particular”.
I also expected more than the £30 offered.
I got a response. In short, £12 reimbursement for the deed poll and £100 for the inconvenience.
So that was that. Nah, I’m pedantic remember. So although satisfied with the amount, I did need to write again and point out that I had requested the money be sent in a cheque and not put on the card which she didn’t do! So, as I had to write again I hoped that the following points would help her in the future.
1) The first page of her letter was a photocopy and not the original on letterheaded notepaper.
2) Fifth bullet point, incorrect use of an apostrophe in the word “fees”
3) “are charges” not “is charges” would be grammatically correct (as in my letter which you could have copied)
4) “You have been advised there is…” No, I advised you on this point and the instances are plural and therefore “are” not “is” is appropriate.
5) No new paragraph on what should have been the first new paragraph on the second page.
6) “…should be made clear to your at the time” should have been “you” not “your”
7) “Halifax so not apply any loading..” doesn’t make any sense, I assume that you mean “do”
8) “…and enclosed your Deed…” “enclose” not “enclosed”
There were a few other things, (not least that she didn’t answer the point about which issue I complained about was necessary) but I won’t bore you now seeing you got this far! Well honestly, I do expect a letter from a bank to be written and checked! Yes, I could have saved my time but frankly, the poor quality letter writing annoyed me and anyway I was being helpful! Perhaps it helped in her future work. I freely give tips for companies on how to avoid complaints!
So, share your experiences of the banking world. Which one is good which one is bad? I have found HSBC pretty good but last time I wrote to them customer service standards were going down and I had to write to the CEO. What do you think of your bank/building society/credit card companies?