It makes you sick

The issue

A customer who suffered from ill health - including depression - complained about the bank’s behaviour in relation to his financial hardship and the repossession of his property. As a result of his ill health, the customer had fallen behind in mortgage repayments. He applied to the bank for assistance with his financial hardship. The customer alleged that over a period of several months, the bank refused to consider his application and merely continued to ask him to complete various forms. The customer complained that the bank’s failure to consider his hardship situation was made worse by the bank’s referral of the matter to external solicitors.

Outcome

 

Clause 25.2
The CCMC considered this complaint in light of three Code provisions.

• The Committee did not consider that the bank responded to the customer’s financial assistance application in a timely manner. It was only after the 3rd contact from the customer, raising serious health concerns that the bank took any direct action.
• The Committee found that the bank’s response to the customer’s reports of financial difficulty were neither timely nor adequate.

Clause 2.2

• The Committee considered that the bank’s representative’s failure to honour a settlement agreement with the customer in respect of the arrears also amounted to a breach of clause 2.2. (Duty to act fairly)
  
  

Clause 35

• The Committee considered that neither the bank nor its solicitors adequately responded to the customer’s initial complaints.
• The customer was not advised who was dealing with his complaint, that he would be charged for dealing with his complaint, or given the names and contact numbers of the people dealing with his complaint, in accordance with clause 35.
• The bank and its representatives failed to respond within the timeframes specified by clause 35.

Remedial Action

The Committee recommended that the bank review and conduct an internal audit of all collection matters referred to the firm of solicitors involved in the complaint within the last six months.

The Committee also recommended that the bank ensure that all external solicitors understand the bank’s commitments in respect of financial hardship and its commitments under the Code.

The Committee further asked the bank to revise its current procedures to ensure that all future matters are dealt with in accordance with clause 35.

The Committee has requested that the bank report back to the Committee on the findings of the review within six months.

Other case studies

Clearing up a problem

The customer’s complaint concerned the deposit and clearance of cheques by the bank. The complaint consisted of three parts.
Read the full case study

On whose authority?

A financial counsellor complained to the Committee on behalf of his client. The counsellor claimed that despite him sending the bank a third party authority form for him to act on the client’s behalf, the bank continually contacted the customer directly.
Read the full case study