NatWest Bank: Declan's complaint about the non-payment of his salary on 24 February has been passed to the Financial Ombudsman for a decision to be published on their website. The never-ending assault on our email continues unabated
I am truly appalled by the unlawful violation of the Heavey's basic right to send and receive email without interference. I would be most grateful for anything you may be able to do by way of taking measures to correct this gross abuse.
An American professor to then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone in 2010
Our Church and State website has no less than 59 Nobel Laureates on it despite the never-ending assault on our email; see paragraph 2 under "Church and State" on this blog's sidebar (updated today).
The Royal Bank of Scotland Group Headquarters in Gogarburn. The RBS owns National Westminster Bank (NatWest).
An investigator at the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has found that the Royal Bank of Scotland Executive Case Manager wouldn't have been reasonably aware when she paid Declan compensation on 17 February that there had been some error previously made by NatWest in setting up a replacement standing order on the Network for Church Monitoring business account for the payment of his salary. His complaint about the subsequent cancellation of the standing order without his knowledge or consent that resulted in the non-payment of his salary on 24 February has been passed to the Ombudsman. His salary continues to be paid online by quick transfer from the business account to his personal account pending an ombudsman's final decision. FOS is required to publish final decisions by their ombudsmen on their website. This was Declan's request yesterday for that review:
On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 at 10:44, Declan Heavey
Dear Ms Darbar,
Thank you for your email.
I do not agree with your view and respectively request that my case be referred to an ombudsman for review.
Firstly, I do not agree with your description of my complaint. Since 25 February 2020, I had been waiting for NatWest to explain why my salary wasn't paid the day previous. I only first received an incongruous explanation about this from you on 8 October 2020.
I understand that you have raised with NatWest my concerns about not receiving the letter you were referring to in your view. However, NatWest could have provided you with the letter far sooner and saved me an amount of distress and inconvenience.
I do not believe that NatWest have acted fairly in the circumstances.
Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring
The FOS investigator writes that "when the executive team wrote to you, they wouldn't have been reasonably aware a cancellation was in the system and would've seen two standing orders set up - one for your [sic] and one for your wife". This is that email from RBS Executive Case Manager Mandy Durkin:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 at 17:02, Durkin, Mandy (Executive Response Team)
Our Ref: PHO-0264121920
17 February 2020
Dear Mr Heavey
Re: Network for Church Monitoring Ltd.
Thank you for your recent emails addressed to Alison Rose, our Chief Executive. Alison has passed your correspondence to me and asked that I contact you on her behalf.
Please accept my apologies for the recent issues and poor service you have described in connection with setting up replacement standing orders. You have outlined that the instructions were taken incorrectly by Tom McKeon on your initial visit to NatWest Stratford Broadway Branch on 11 February 2020 and that you have had need to duplicate the request and visited another branch as a result.
I have discussed your concerns with Tom, who conveyed his apologies and confirmed that he had set up the instruction incorrectly and not verified the payment frequency. Regrettably, this failure has initiated your subsequent follow up contacts to the bank in order to seek correcting actions. I am sorry for the administration errors and lack of support you've described receiving. From my review of bank records I can confirm that the correcting actions are now completed in full.
All previous lapsed and incorrect standing orders have been cancelled. There are now two remaining active standing orders that have been set up as you requested, one payable to yourself and one payable to Mrs Heavey, for the amount of £140 fortnightly. The instructions are set up with an initial payment date of 24 February 2020 and a final payment date of 8 February 2021, against the reference *****400.
I am genuinely sorry for the trouble and frustration we have caused you. While there is no substitute for getting things right first time, I have credited £100 compensation to account number ending *400 in recognition of your time, travel costs and inconvenience in this case.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to bring this matter to our attention and allowing me the opportunity to address your concerns. I trust that these actions have resolved matters for you. Please don't hesitate to contact me should you have any further questions or queries in this regard.
Although I hope it won't be necessary, I am obliged to advise you that you have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge – but you must do so within six months of the date of this email. If you do not refer your complaint in time, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances (for example, if the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances). Further information about the service is available in their leaflet http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/consumer-leaflet.htm and on their website www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk
Yours sincerely
Mandy
Mandy Durkin | Executive Case Manager| Customer Service & Operations | Commercial Banking
Will this FOS investigator's explanation appear in the public record? The Bank only cites "some error" in setting up the standing order
FOS investigator: "NatWest have said although the cancellation was processed on the 12th February 2020, it wasn't uploaded for processing until later – so it didn't actually cancel until the 19 February 2020" (see bold print in para. 4 below).
"The executive complaints team wrote to you in their final response on 17 February 2020. I can see they upheld your complaint and acknowledged the member of staff in the branch had set up the standing orders incorrectly causing errors. They recognised the inconvenience caused and offered you £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
"In the same Final Response Letter, they confirmed that both standing orders were now correctly set up to you and your wife and you should have no further issues – however this was not the case and in March [inaccurate] you realised the standing order to you had not gone through.
"Having reviewed the information, I can see on the 12 February 2020 - the same day you set up the standing orders - a cancellation of a different standing order to your account also took place [misleading]. You've told me this was authorised by you and completed just before you set up the new standing orders to yourself and your wife.
"NatWest have said although the cancellation was processed on the 12th February 2020, it wasn't uploaded for processing until later – so it didn't actually cancel until the 19 February 2020 [emphasis added]. I do understand your frustration and the fact that you felt NatWest were dishonest [misleading], but when the executive team wrote to you, they wouldn't have been reasonably aware a cancellation was in the system and would've seen two standing orders set up - one for your [sic] and one for your wife.
"So, on balance I'm satisfied the information relayed to you in the Final Response letter was correct at the time of writing.
"On 12 March 2020, NatWest issued another Final Response Letter.[1] Once again, they admitted errors had been made and offered a further £75.00p for the distress and inconvenience caused which I think is fair. They also said according to their records, no standing order could be seen for you and only one standing order was set up for your wife. Because of this they explained as per their process and if you wanted the standing order set up for you, then to contact the complaint handler directly for this to be completed."
__________________________
[1] Declan only received this second Final Response Letter dated 12 March 2020 seven months to the day later. The FOS investigator sent him the letter on 12 October 2020. It only cites "some error" in setting up the standing order; no specifics are provided. "I agree with your complaint," it says though.
FOS investigator: "NatWest have said although the cancellation was processed on the 12th February 2020, it wasn't uploaded for processing until later – so it didn't actually cancel until the 19 February 2020" (see bold print in para. 4 below).
"The executive complaints team wrote to you in their final response on 17 February 2020. I can see they upheld your complaint and acknowledged the member of staff in the branch had set up the standing orders incorrectly causing errors. They recognised the inconvenience caused and offered you £100 for the distress and inconvenience caused.
"In the same Final Response Letter, they confirmed that both standing orders were now correctly set up to you and your wife and you should have no further issues – however this was not the case and in March [inaccurate] you realised the standing order to you had not gone through.
"Having reviewed the information, I can see on the 12 February 2020 - the same day you set up the standing orders - a cancellation of a different standing order to your account also took place [misleading]. You've told me this was authorised by you and completed just before you set up the new standing orders to yourself and your wife.
"NatWest have said although the cancellation was processed on the 12th February 2020, it wasn't uploaded for processing until later – so it didn't actually cancel until the 19 February 2020 [emphasis added]. I do understand your frustration and the fact that you felt NatWest were dishonest [misleading], but when the executive team wrote to you, they wouldn't have been reasonably aware a cancellation was in the system and would've seen two standing orders set up - one for your [sic] and one for your wife.
"So, on balance I'm satisfied the information relayed to you in the Final Response letter was correct at the time of writing.
"On 12 March 2020, NatWest issued another Final Response Letter.[1] Once again, they admitted errors had been made and offered a further £75.00p for the distress and inconvenience caused which I think is fair. They also said according to their records, no standing order could be seen for you and only one standing order was set up for your wife. Because of this they explained as per their process and if you wanted the standing order set up for you, then to contact the complaint handler directly for this to be completed."
__________________________
[1] Declan only received this second Final Response Letter dated 12 March 2020 seven months to the day later. The FOS investigator sent him the letter on 12 October 2020. It only cites "some error" in setting up the standing order; no specifics are provided. "I agree with your complaint," it says though.
9 October: Yesterday I received no Mailtrack alerts and this morning no Mailtrack report. Almost certainly my two permission emails yesterday to space advocates were blocked. Today Declan will email 20 distinguished scientists and experts. It wouldn't be the first time that not one of his 20 emails gets through
From My Picks
29 October: Facebook continues to ensure that Church and State gets little or no traffic from our Page. The Financial Ombudsman Service will update Declan every three months on the progress of the complaint he submitted last February following the non-payment of his salary by standing order
Our list of 285 Honorary Associates includes 16 Nobel Prize laureates, 11 US National Medal of Science laureates and 12 knighted professors notwithstanding the excessive targeting of these three categories of emails in particular.
http://churchandstate.org.uk/honorary-associates/
"Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." Edd Doerr (1930-2020), (then) President, Americans for Religious Liberty
