I am in an email exchange with A+L over the 25 exit fee they charge when you transfer money out of their Direct Mini Cash ISA. I am basically saying that I don't think they have very good grounds to charge this fee and I'd like some opinions from anybody out there to say that my argument, which is outlined below is a load of spherical objects or whether there is something to it.
My argument revolves around point 5.5 in their T+ C's which basically states that an exit fee '...may be payable'. I am focusing in on the word 'MAY', because to me it implies there are circumstances where the fee may NOT be payable. In fact I argue that they could could just as easily insert the phrase 'MAY NOT' be payable and still be just as definitive about whether an exit fee should be charged or not.
I have stated to them that I might refuse to pay this exit fee because they have not stated the circumstances within their T + C's when this fee is payable or not. I have gone on to say that if I were to transfer my money out from their organisation how would I know that the circumstances under which I transfer my money out are the exact circumstance under which a fee is payable. I would clearly want to know the other circumstance in which a fee is not payable so that I could avoid paying it. As they don't clarify the circumstances under which this fee is payable, they therefore do not have any basis to charge this fee, as they have not defined when a fee is or is not payable.
I hope you get the gist of what I am trying to convey here. It basically boils down to the implications and interpretation of the word 'MAY'. Any thoughts anyone? Just to let you know that they have always responded to my email the day after I send my next email to back up my argument on this issue. At the momnet it's been 2 days without hearing from them. Either they're ignoring my email or perhaps they are scurrying around trying to find a sensible get out clause. What do you think?