Re: Alliance & Leicester STINK!!!

Even where it's likely that the cheque will be bounced again because the issuer hasn't been given enough time to do anything about it?

Many people live on fixed incomes of £100 a week or so. If A&L takes £100 off them for being £40 overdrawn for 4 days they then have to stump up £125 in total (they have the £25 overdraft to settle).

Don't you reckon that might leave people a teensy bit short? Pensioners/children without food? Do the sums Boyle, see what you come up with.

Like an ID card, for instance?

I've got into difficulties a few times since my husband and I have a joint current account, and he has a tendancy to buy himself presents from Ebay without checking the account balance or whether a bill (or three) is due. In each case as soon as I'm aware of the fact (normally within a week, as I check my statements online) I go into the local branch and speak to one of their account managers. Only once was he unable to waive all the charges applied, and that was because we'd

I don't think that's necessarily a fair comment. A "measly few thousand" may represent the entire wealth of a given individual. If they have all of their accounts and do all of their business with a single bank, then their loyalty is much greater (and potentially more valuable to the bank should they come in to a windfall as the bank in question is far more likely to obtain the additional business) than a rich person who holds savings accounts stuffed full of money at several different banks without having any loyalty to any one bank.

"john boyle" wrote

I said so didn't I? At no point have I questioned the legitimacy of the first penalty payment.

be in your account at the

If that's the case then the T&C should be reviewed to take into account the interests of the customer as well as the bank.

Maybe not. But I do feel ripped off by being charged almost 60 for one small mistake and disrespected & unvalued when my request for a bit of leniency falls on deaf ears. A person feeling ripped off and unvalued is likely to a) pursue the matter until they feel it is resolved fairly and or b) 'vote with their feet'. (a) means a lot more A&L staff time will be spent dealing with the dissatisfied customer than it would take if they operated with a more flexible and humane ethos to start with.

'Voting with feet' may not be a big threat to them on an individual level, especially with accounts of what they clearly perceive as second class customers (who originally opened Girobank accounts).

However, according to it's own Chief Exec, the marketing ethos of the Alliance & Leicester is "To attract customers on a better value proposition. Then to get them to buy from us by being straightforward with them. Then to get them to stay and buy more by being friendly and approachable and by recognising customer relationships." (Richard Pym December 03). (You're not quite there yet Richard!)

People's circumstances change and if the A&L had offered a better service over the years (they rip you off on international transfers too but that's a different story) who knows, I may have chosen to move my 'main' account there. Instead here I am, feeling ripped off and more and more wound up, doing all I can to discourage people from banking with them. Little ripples I know but maybe they will spread. In a couple of years when my daughter and her friends are opening their first bank accounts she's going to be telling them don't go to the Alliance & Leicester, they rip you off. And I bet some of those kids are going to be high earners and consumers of banking products.

I therefore don't buy the argument that it makes commercial sense to the A&L to treat small customers so inflexibly. I'm fairly sure if they'd just refunded my 29.50 after the fourth or fifth time I asked nicely it would have been a more cost-effective option for them.

Wrong. I quite willingly pay bank charges on other accounts which are handled according to what I perceive to be fair, humane principles.

I'm leaving it, as fast as I can.

In message , PeteM writes

Hmm, doesnt the same argument imply that all necessities should be free as well?

In message , Stephen Burke writes

Yes. BUT there will be at least three, if not four banking days time.

RD = no chance at all

RDPR = could be a c*ck up their end, give them another chance.

In message , Genie writes

I take your point, but a bank dont make any money on a measly few grand so your loyalty aint worth a bean to the bank.

In message , claire writes

I agree, A&L are out of line with the old style clearers here. Vote with your feet (or fone or PC) and change to a real bank.

They bought the Girobank operation and have inherited its style and systems and ethos which go for bulk not quality. Your logic is impeccable but is lost completely on A&L Bootle which goes for 'no discretion' at all.

Good, there are better deals out there!

In message , Matthew Church writes

Hey Church, re-read your original posting.

Do you REALLY think there are loads of people are "being plunged into STARVATION by these sorts of tactics." eh?

Exaggeration?

Exactly... bring back the old bank manager who knew his customers (even over the 'phone... no "mother's maiden name, DOB, password" rubbish, just recognising the voice on the other end of the telephone).

I have thought of an interesting way to annoy a bank which has annoyed you - if you or someone else has time to spare. With one account... deposit 3 pounds. Then on alternate days go into a branch and deposit one pound, the next day withdraw a pound, ad infinitum.

Axel

So do you think the bank should employ usury at incredible rates?

Axel

Why is a bank account a necessity?

I think there is often a misconception as to how a bank recognises it's 'valued' customers. It is very simple though - those customers who choose to purchase financial instruments from the one organisation, and hence provide a profit stream. In this respect I think that Genie hit the nail on the head:

Mr customer MAY only have 1000 cash asset to their name, but DOES choose to have their home insurance, credit card, mortgage and life insurance with the bank. THAT is loyalty, and generally it is rewarded - through lower lending rates, preferential loyalty products and special offer investment products; as well as a more preferential attitude.

I find it amusing when dealing with a customer who says "I am a loyal customer and want you to refund x or y charge", and then learn that the customer's personal loan is with Tesco's, their mortgage is with the Halifax and are insured through Norwich Union. What further bemuses me is that after suitable enquiry I identify I can offer same or better financial products at a lesser cost, with added benefits, the customer declines to switch saying that they "have been with NU/Halifax etc for years and wouldn't want to change" THAT customer does NOT get a refund! That said, the customer who earns 200 a month but DOES purchase her contents insurance from me, who runs a modest but generally well run account, is always polite to my cashiers and generally BUYS from me will have just about every charge refunded if it is appropriate.

Since when did having a poxy current account imply loyalty? In this respect I heartily back John Boyle!!

MC

This is unrealistic Axel! I am the manager of a small village branch, and yes, I do sometimes recognise people on the phone by voice alone. Unfortunately even my small branch has a catchement of some 9,000 customers! It is completely unreasonable to expect me to know them ALL! I have been working in this outlet for a year and a half and even now could only recognise probably 200 customers by voice alone.

What you seem not to realise is that the 'old bank manager' worked in a different era, where personal banking accounts were NOT the norm, and generally restricted to the more wealthy, or those in need of a range of banking services. Joe the carpenter did not need a bank! (Well perhaps he did, but he chose to put his fivers in the case under the bed!!)

The 'old bank manager' was an efficient business model when he/she could personally service the needs of a known customer base. With the explosion in the need for banking services, and the complexity of modern client needs, it is necessary to have 'mortgage specialists', 'investment specialists' and entire departments, such as 'deceased estates', 'IT support' etc etc.

Why do think this would annoy them - they would just consider you a wanker with no life for doing this! They would not even care.

MC

In message , Marcus Collie writes

Thank you Sir. Methinks we have similar backgrounds...........

john boyle posted

No, because we all *want* necessities for their own sake. We don't all want bank accounts.

They are useless. Send a recorded delivey letter demanding a written explanation of the actions they have taken and ask for your money back, to be replied within 14 days failing which you will complain to the Financial Services Authority. Then actually complain to the FSA repeating what you have said. Also send it to the BBC Money Program.. It takes this sort of action to make them cave in. They will.

I would actually go to a branch with a local newspaper in attendance and hand each customer a leaflet summarising how they have treated you.

They offered a good interest rate on a business account so I opened one. They took about 4 months to open it I won't bore you all with the inability to find me by name, or business name, or postal district or their own reference on the application when I tried to chase them. True, really! It took about 15 minutes each time to get through the Q The people I spoke to appeared entirely untrained. I put money in, but then after 2 months or so they cut back from the 6 months of favourable rate and went back to the .000001% (6 months from the first contact, not when funds when in) I now have about 20 pieces of paper regarding the account But my money is out forever. And I have sold my shares.