Problems with Direct Debit

RangeR

Sorry. Received this early October. Basically same as above but for personal account. I got lazy / busy.

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3

cookie1977

You wouldn't want to be in a hurry (with them, not with you!)

RangeR

So, BOI responded to FSO on the various points, on both my personal complaint and business one. It's a little less flippant than the original "Final Response" but substantially the same. I have about 8 more days to reply to FSO. Anyone willing to assist in the replies? If so, we can do it here or collaboratively on Google Drive. I know what I want to say, I'm just struggling in saying the same thing in different ways. I do know that BOI's response is far from sufficient and lacking responsibility or accountability. Other than some of it being non factual.

BOI Business Response
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6

BOI Personal Response
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6


I have requested that Three let me know whether I'm on DD or DD+. I'm pretty sure it's the old DD but it was two years ago that I signed up.

cookie1977

RangeR wrote: »

So, BOI responded to FSO on the various points, on both my personal complaint and business one. It's a little less flippant than the original "Final Response" but substantially the same. I have about 8 more days to reply to FSO. Anyone willing to assist in the replies? If so, we can do it here or collaboratively on Google Drive. I know what I want to say, I'm just struggling in saying the same thing in different ways. I do know that BOI's response is far from sufficient and lacking responsibility or accountability. Other than some of it being non factual.

BOI Business Response
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6

BOI Personal Response
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6

Count me in. I'll take a look tomorrow morning.

RangeR

So, Three have confirmed what I thought. I'm on Direct Debit with them, not Direct Debit Plus, as asserted incorrectly by BOI in their response. Do BOI not have a written mandate from me, then? Interesting ponderings.

cookie1977

RangeR wrote: »

So, Three have confirmed what I thought. I'm on Direct Debit with them, not Direct Debit Plus, as asserted incorrectly by BOI in their response. Do BOI not have a written mandate from me, then? Interesting ponderings.

I wont gat to look at this until late tonight but I'll get to it. Interesting that from Three.

RangeR

k. I've formulated my reply on the business account. Feel free to comment publicly or privately. I won't past the contents here as it's the guts of 3 A4 pages.

I'm doing up the private account now but it will be substantially similar.

To hard, too soft, could more be put in/taken out?

I hope to submit both tomorrow after lunch so time is off the essence


Attached.

EDIT : Private account complaint attached.

EDIT 2 : As of today there are 16,211 views

wmpdd3

Though I think the tone is warranted and I love the quotes from the DD guarantee, the use of capitol letters lets it down.

From reading complaint letters in a different type of business, this use of capitals doesnt bode well.

Nit sure if that is the type of feedback you wanted.

BOI are well and truly in the wrong and how they can even consider themselves right goes to show they complete misunderstanding of the DD system .

Where else do you have this that it is getting 16k hits?

Maximus Alexander

wmpdd3 wrote: »

Where else do you have this that it is getting 16k hits?

This thread has over 16k hits. Although I would imagine those are page impressions rather than unique users.

RangeR

wmpdd3 wrote: »

Though I think the tone is warranted and I love the quotes from the DD guarantee, the use of capitol letters lets it down.

From reading complaint letters in a different type of business, this use of capitals doesnt bode well.

Nit sure if that is the type of feedback you wanted.

BOI are well and truly in the wrong and how they can even consider themselves right goes to show they complete misunderstanding of the DD system .

Where else do you have this that it is getting 16k hits?

Yes, I agree. I'll remove the capitals and make it a little more formal. I got quite emotional writing those two documents

wmpdd3

I don't think banks do emotion!

other than that, great letters.

RangeR

OK. Thanks for all the input. I emailed both of my responses back to FSO just now. I've updated them to take a lot of the fluff out [caps, emotion etc]. And expanded on some extra points from the Rulebook.

The documents are substantially the same but I've attached them here, if you want a read.

Probably looking into the New Year before I get a response, so. .. Happy Christmas to all you and yours. And a thank you for sticking by this. There have been times when I didn't want to go on but got prodded and poked in the right places, both publicly and privately. It all helped.

eMail in from FSO as I was writing this. It's a standard acknowledgement receipt but something tells me that the bank have already washed their hands.

Dear Mr. Burke,

I acknowledge receipt of your two submissions regarding the two separate complaints. These submissions will now be passed to the Bank. The Bank is not obliged to respond and may indicate that it does not wish to respond. If the Bank does not respond, the cases will move forward to final adjudication.

Regards,
Senior FSO Rep

cookie1977

RangeR wrote: »

OK. Thanks for all the input. I emailed both of my responses back to FSO just now. I've updated them to take a lot of the fluff out [caps, emotion etc]. And expanded on some extra points from the Rulebook.

The documents are substantially the same but I've attached them here, if you want a read.

Probably looking into the New Year before I get a response, so. .. Happy Christmas to all you and yours. And a thank you for sticking by this. There have been times when I didn't want to go on but got prodded and poked in the right places, both publicly and privately. It all helped.

eMail in from FSO as I was writing this. It's a standard acknowledgement receipt but something tells me that the bank have already washed their hands.

good, bad, indifferent there's an end in sight!!

RangeR

Received FSO responses on Christmas eve. I opened one and read half way through it. Didn't like what I saw so dumped them until today. See below. Bank refutes everything. No recorded calls. Refutes that Compliance Manager said what she said. Basically, it's my word against hers. Admitted that they changed the DD rules to suit them selves [Current Account T's & C's] etc.

Business Cover
Business 01
Business 02

Personal Cover
Personal 01
Personal 02

BOI also included a photo copied version of their Terms and Conditions document for Personal, Golden Years, Graduate current accounts etc, in both responses. It's about 8 pages, front and back.

On that note, I brought things to a close. It's obvious that the bank aren't going to budge. The below email was sent twice to the FSO. Once for each complaint.

On 30 December 2013 15:13, Keith Burke wrote:
FSO Rep,

I would hasten to say that I refute everything the bank has responded with. However, I also don't want to go around in circles.

There are obvious things that the bank are omitting in their replies, items that are factually incorrect, changing of Direct Debit Scheme rules to suit their interests, among others.

It is to this end, that I leave the issue to your department to make their final judgement. I appreciate the time you spent on this.




Kindest Regards
Keith Burke

cookie1977

Well done for going as far as you did against a brick wall. It's interesting to see the bank refer you to their T&C's. Whats the point of having IPSO and DD T&C's if the banks feel that their own T&C's supersede anything they agreed to with a wider body they themselves subscribe to.

I really would query the above with the FSO but I appreciate the efforts you've gone to to date. Well done and lets hope the FSO make the right decision on this whole episode. Dont think I can thank you enough for sticking with this.

wmpdd3

I am not surprised in the least, in the last few months I have seen banks do things you'd only expect of a dodgy used car sales man.

The costumers version of events is usually seen as wing until they provide proof.

They feel well above any body set up to monitor them and will down anyone who complains in useless irelivent paperwork as a reply.

Also I think it is getting worse with the increased use of phone to discuss business, I record calls and ask for a letter confirming directions after each call.

RangeR

Not wanting to take this thread too off topic, the below links provide some light reading. Listing them here as there is little or no info on the IPSO website other than FAQ's and brief points.

SEPA Council - SEPA Direct Debits [SDD]
SEPA Direct Debit Core Rulebook v6.1
SEPA Direct Debit Core Rulebook v7
SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme e-Mandate Service Implementation Guidelines Version 6.0
SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme Advance Mandate Information Service Implementation Guidelines Version 6.0
SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme e-Mandate Service Implementation Guidelines Version 7.0
SEPA Direct Debit Core Scheme Advance Mandate Information Service Implementation Guidelines Version 7.0
SEPA Direct Debit Mandate

I've excluded specific links regarding SEPA Business to Business [SDD B2B] as we're only really interested in Consumer to Business [C2B]

RangeR

Right. Received the final ruling from FSO. Two envelopes. One for business and one for personal account. Both were substantially the same.

FSO found in favour of the Bank in both cases. In their final ruling, they used a lot of the terminology that the Bank used in the last two correspondence and , it seems, none of my arguments.

In essence, the bank were a third party and were not responsible in any way for money coming out of my account.

I was awarded €100 for each complaint due the the Bank's mishandling of the issues. I don't want the ****ing money.

I'll post up the letters soon.

lil5

RangeR wrote: »

...
FSO found in favour of the Bank in both cases. ...

:eek:
After following this thread pretty much from the outset this is an absolutely shocking ruling.

cookie1977

Pretty disgusting alright. It does seem like the ombudsman did not really want to see your point of view at all. How can they think that banks are not responsible for third party activity on a customers account. They are the middle men that permit the illegal activity. It really does show how the DD system is rotten to the core and that no party (ombudsman or bank) actually care that it is. Probably because most people do not put in the effort to lodge complaints when things like this happen.

wmpdd3

That just says it all.

What ever about a private customer having to deal with this crap with dd,, there is no way a business could operate with the threat of a disputed dd coming out of their account.

Now I understand why my mother will only deal in cheques.

The company get the money when she has signed her cheque, any issues she can cancel the cheque from her side.

Fair play to you for following this to the bitter end, personally I'd be getting on to the press with this, more people need know the ombudsman's interpertation of the ipso's dd guarantee.

zynaps

wmpdd3 wrote: »

Fair play to you for following this to the bitter end, personally I'd be getting on to the press with this, more people need know the ombudsman's interpertation of the ipso's dd guarantee.

Yes, this is appalling. I'm disappointed that the FSO didn't even summarise RangeR's own arguments to indicate that they'd paid serious attention to them. This suggests that they have no interest whatsoever in the core issue: the DD "guarantee" is worth nothing... well hold on, €100 per complaint, minus the hours and hours of your time spent on it, minus costs for getting audited accounts etc, so MUCH LESS THAN NOTHING.

I agree with wmpdd3 here -- people need to be aware of the fact that the DD guarantee is worth less than nothing. The scheme has become pretty much the de facto payment scheme for utilities and semi-essential services, so we've handed banks and businesses enormous power which needs responsibilities met from both.

This case and its outcome should serve as evidence that banks displaying the "DD guarantee" text anywhere are guilty of false advertising, because there is no DD guarantee.

Time for everyone to contact the ASAI?

RangeR

Cheers for the words of support. I'm not sure if this is worth persuing. The Direct Debit Scheme, for all intents, is dead. SEPA is the new Scheme and the rules are quite different. Some are the same, some are different and some... well, let's just say that there might be big holes in SEPA for the average Joe.

I'll have to read over the rules in detail but there is a question mark on the ability to cancel a Direct Debit ala the old scheme.

NINJA EDIT : I'm in work at the mo. I'll post up the two responses when I get home tonight.

Legislator

RangeR wrote: »

Cheers for the words of support. I'm not sure if this is worth persuing. The Direct Debit Scheme, for all intents, is dead. SEPA is the new Scheme and the rules are quite different. Some are the same, some are different and some... well, let's just say that there might be big holes in SEPA for the average Joe.

I'll have to read over the rules in detail but there is a question mark on the ability to cancel a Direct Debit ala the old scheme.

NINJA EDIT : I'm in work at the mo. I'll post up the two responses when I get home tonight.

Cancellation of a DD doesn't change with SEPA. Banks in Ireland will continue to accept cancellations from customers and you should also advise the Creditor.

Legislator

SEPA Direct Debit - what's new and what stays the same.

New - Consumer Rights
1. Blacklist & whitelist - debtors can blacklist Creditors from debiting their account or alternatively provide a list to their Bank of Creditors who may debit their account.
2. Limit the amount and frequency of a direct debit.
3. Block your account from all direct debits
4. Refund of unauthorised direct debit up to 13 months after it was debited.
New - Direct Debit Scheme
No questions asked refund of a direct debit for 8 weeks after it was debited.
Other new
Pay DD's to any Creditor in Europe from your Irish bank account
New mandates - BIC / IBAN now required.
New timelines for submitting transactions to banks
New R transactions, returns, rejects, refusal and refunds.
Each mandate has a unique reference number
Stays the same
1. Advance notice
2. Cancellation
3. Refuse a DD prior to date of debiting.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Legislator

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

They have no choice - its a Scheme rule.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

RangeR

Legislator wrote: »

They have no choice - its a Scheme rule.

Legislator, Bank of Ireland, by their own admission, acknowledge that they don't follow Scheme rules. They state, quite clearly, that their own bank terms and conditions supersede the Direct Debit Scheme. I have it in black and white, to which was their final response over Christmas, to the FSO.

Actually, it's one of the documents I attached to a post a short while ago. I just didn't post the T's & C;s doc as it was many pages to photo and attach. It can be obtained from any branch, I'm sure.

RangeR

Not once did the FSO, in it's final ruling acknowledge the fact that I got the run around and had to fight for my refund. In fact, it clearly states the banks line in that the refund came the very next business day. While that's technically correct, if I didn't fight for my rights, the Bank would have left me waiting for over two weeks while they get refunded by the SPONSORING bank.

Now, tell me... How am I supposed to take solace in the Scheme rules and guarantees when the banks don't.

I'm pissed at the outcome, but to be honest, not surprised.