Is it valid?

[Vampyra]

Today in my dealings with NatWest, I was told that if you pay cash in on a Monday at midday, and cheques are drawn that morning, they wil charge you because you have signed a contract stating that you understand cash paid in on one day is not available for use as funds til the next day. Thus I would have had to pay it in on the Friday to stop the charges.

 

And when you state 5.5 of the banking code about giving 14 days notice of all charges on an account, they say that is not right they have apparently superceeded the Banking Code by printing leaflets stating their charges and that they will charge on the same day.

 

Also, I was told sometimes they will "allow" a customer the right of going over their limit and not charging them if there is not the cleared funds at that moment because they are aware that money will be paid in. It is discretionary and they also can decide to charge you if they wish. This again can't be right can it? I pointed out on my account that they had not charged me earlier in the month when this occured, why now. The answer was because they chose to. So they have made a choice to increase and snowball my charges, even though they have the discretion and Banking Code 14.1 to waive these when they know it will cause hardship and when they know money is regularly going in.

 

[gothicf0rm]

natwest have superceded the banking code now? lol. ive never heard of a bank "superceding" the banking code.

natwest's own legal code says -

"24 NatWest subscribes to the Banking Code and Business Banking Code. If you would like a Banking Code or Business Banking Code leaflet ask a member of staff at any branch. Full details of the Code are also available from the British Bankers' Association website."

[Guest]

Maybe that applies to new accounts NOW but I don't see them able to apply that retrospectively. Yes, they do change their terms and conditions from time to time, but unless you've specifically signed up to that I don't think they can force it on you if your account was opened before this was introduced.

 

It's likely they'll try and say that because you keep your account open even when they change the T&C you're agreeing to them, but as bankfodder has already pointed out in another thread IMPLIED agreement in a contract is not the same as EXPLICIT agreement. You can't simply say that something is the case because it wasn't protested about in time.

 

They do say that funds paid in after 2:30 might not be cleared until the following morning, but that is their POLICY and I don't think it can hold in law. If you deposit cash and get a receipt, by law that receipt says "At this point in time, I took posession of this and therefore I give this receipt to show it" - from that moment on, if you deposit in cash, the bank has got your money and is obliged to pay your money out in standing orders, direct debits, cheques et al. Not to display it as cleared funds is their choice, but once that receipt is issued, they've got the money which they must administer according to your instructions.

 

Moral of the story: ALWAYS get a receipt. The number of times I've brought a smile to people in the queue's face when the bank teller says "Would you like a receipt for it?" - I always raise my voice slightly when I answer "Gee, let's think. Not getting a receipt would indicate I trust my bank so... Yes, I most DEFINATELY want a receipt!"

[Vampyra]

[gothicf0rm]

it applies to ALL accounts from when the term was added to the terms and conditions from that point onwards. you need to find the old terms and conditions to see. they should be able to supply you with a copy of your contract, infact they are legally required to supply you with a copy not only of your originally contract but also every revision made since.

[BankFodder]

infact they are legally required to supply you with a copy not only of your originally contract but also every revision made since.

This is not to dispute what you say but can you tell me what is the source of this legal obligation, please.

[gothicf0rm]

most recent one i imagine would be the 1999 act. its been established contract law for a very long time, the idea being if they cant produce the contract you have no agreement.

[Vampyra]

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group