NatWest Advantage Gold Package Account Fees

[stevedresden]

Hi - a third person here currently going through the complaints procedure over an Advantage Gold account that I held from 2001 to 2005.

 

I explained a number of reasons in my complaint as to why I believed that in retrospect I felt that I was mis-sold the AG account, but my final response came 8 weeks to the day later and guess what? “Time-barred, so therefore we will not address your complaint.”

 

I’ve taken it to the FOS, based on the fact that the passage of time is of no consequence to the fact that I believe it was mis-sold.

 

The final response also claims that I had the account for five years and could have cancelled at any time if I was unhappy – even though one of my specific complaints was that I tried to cancel the account several times, but was intimidated/pressured into keeping it!

 

Given that AG was one of the very first packaged accounts, it was clearly an immature product that the staff were pressured into selling regardless of whether it was suitable or not. I’m sure that these days PAs are much better and the banks are far more wary of mis-selling complaints, so by definition a lot of those complaining will be complaining about issues in the early 2000s (as this thread proves!)

[panther12]

Same with us, almost bang on the 8 week limit. As they're not considering any other parts of the complaint only the dates and that it's out of time then I don't think it should take 8 weeks to send a stock refusal letter. Looks like they've adopted a frustrate & delay tactics. Did you go straight to FOS after their final response letter or give them another opportunity to reconsider.

[stevedresden]

Yes – I went straight to the FOS, I figured that trying to argue with them would just mean another 8 week wait, or worse – no response at all.

I made the point to the FOS that they didn’t need to wait 8 weeks to stonewall me on the time-bar issue

Also highlighted the other generic point they made which was that

 

"As with all of our products and services NatWest follows strict processes when customers open a packaged account"

which may be true now, but clearly wasn’t in 2001 so why even mention it?

 

Did you also get the stock phrase:

"We do not advise on the suitability of packaged accounts and therefore it is the responsibility of each customer to decide whether the account is appropriate for their needs"

in your Final Response?

It seems an odd thing to say. If they don’t advise on the suitability of packaged accounts, why did they spend all that time convincing me that it was suitable and that I was very very wrong when I said I wasn’t sure it was appropriate?

[panther12]

With ours they say that because they sent out "review letters" which reminded you of the benefits provided by the account,

highlighted the costs of the packaged account and explained the T&Cs then that is the commencement of the 3 year date to raise a complaint

as they beleive that is is the date we had sufficient knowledge and information to raise any concerns.

 

 

It's a load of pathetic clap-trap

 

 

if they seriously think that by sending out some bumf highlighting the benefits of the packaged account can start the limitation clock!

 

 

I think they must be trying to beat Lloyds record as the highest fined bank for shoddy complaints handling and misleading customers.

[stevedresden]

Strangely on my letter they didn't mention sending me review letters - which is good because I don't ever remember getting any, and I mentioned this in my complaint.

 

Perhaps because I was an online banking customer, I didn't get sent them? I suspect I was meant to look online to see what the changes were - which I wouldn't know to do if they didn't tell me about them!

 

The things that stick in my mind from this awful account were a travel website called "Octopus" that never worked properly and didn't seem very cheap - and a website where you could buy CDs online that was much more expensive than play.com and amazon! Top benefits!

[panther12]

Yes – I went straight to the FOS, I figured that trying to argue with them would just mean another 8 week wait, or worse – no response at all.

I made the point to the FOS that they didn’t need to wait 8 weeks to stonewall me on the time-bar issue

Also highlighted the other generic point they made which was that

 

"As with all of our products and services NatWest follows strict processes when customers open a packaged account"

which may be true now, but clearly wasn’t in 2001 so why even mention it?

 

Did you also get the stock phrase:

"We do not advise on the suitability of packaged accounts and therefore it is the responsibility of each customer to decide whether the account is appropriate for their needs"

in your Final Response?

It seems an odd thing to say. If they don’t advise on the suitability of packaged accounts, why did they spend all that time convincing me that it was suitable and that I was very very wrong when I said I wasn’t sure it was appropriate?

Before going to FOS I did write back to the exec office to give them one final chance and mentioned the 8 weeks wait to simply fob me off with the time-bar. They replied appologising for the delay it had taken, refunded £180 which represents 12 months fees as way of appology for the time taken, but stand firm in their decision that it's time-barred. So off to FOS it goes.

[stevedresden]

Mine has gone to the FOS now and is in progress, waiting for Nat West to respond to them with their records of my case...more delaying tactics I'm sure, but I have nothing to lose, that money is long gone!

[stevedresden]

Hmmm - received a particularly lame response from the FOS today saying that Nat West are right to time bar my complaint. That's it.

 

My problem here is that I did try and complain at the time and this resulted first in them heavy-handedly convincing me to keep the account, and then later when I finally had enough and cancelled it, my complaint was met with "sorry you weren't happy, we will downgrade the account". This was in 2006. I had no crystal ball and no idea that nearly 10 years later I would ever be able to claim my money back!

 

The limp statement from the FOS is "Saying you didn't know you could complain wouldn't usually be exceptional because people generally know they can complain when things go wrong"

 

On that basis I think I'm going to go back to the fos and push the issue that I did actually complain in person at the branch at the time. They are confusing me knowing I could complain with knowing that I could claim compensation

 

What's most frustrating is that the Advantage Gold account in the early 2000's was so bad, and the mis-selling was so rampant, that this is clearly the timeframe when the most severe cases will originate. Nat West must be laughing themselves silly that they're getting away with it on the time bar excuse.

[dx100uk]

own thread created.

 

 

dx

[stevedresden]

You won't be surprised, and neither am I, that the FOS rejected the misselling complaint on the time bar. They didn't even bother to investigate. Just said "yes the bank are right - you are too late"

 

Frustrating but I guess you could say I'm no worse off. If I'd formally complained within the time bar then the bank wouldn't have given me any money back. Yet another stitch up job from the banks and the FOS are utterly toothless.

 

The fact is that I WAS mis-sold this account in 2000. A shame that consumer protection is so weak that we allow banks to hide behind the length of time since the crime

[panther12]

You won't be surprised, and neither am I, that the FOS rejected the misselling complaint on the time bar. They didn't even bother to investigate. Just said "yes the bank are right - you are too late"

 

Frustrating but I guess you could say I'm no worse off. If I'd formally complained within the time bar then the bank wouldn't have given me any money back. Yet another stitch up job from the banks and the FOS are utterly toothless.

 

The fact is that I WAS mis-sold this account in 2000. A shame that consumer protection is so weak that we allow banks to hide behind the length of time since the crime

 

I don't know if it's too late now but if the rejection came from an adjudicator you can ask the FOS for an Ombudsman to review the adjudicators decision. In our case we're still waiting for the FOS to make a decision.

[dave882]

Sorry to interrupt but I find this case very interesting.

 

 

I am in the same boat having no knowledge of any PPI paid by us until my wife contacted a claims company last year.

 

 

They told us we had paid PPI from 1989 until 1993 and I submitted a claim myself.

 

 

This claim was accepted and a refund made at which time I was also advised that Gold Account fess could be claimed.

 

 

We had an account until 2006 but I have just received the same reply from NatWest that my claim is out of date.

 

 

I will write to the Ombudsman because until our PPI claim we had no idea current account fees could be reclaimed.