RBS system delays messed up a straightforward case

I sympathise with Dan McGeehan in his letter about First Active (Mortgage Strategy March 24) although my recent beef is with the Royal Bank of Scotland on a straightforward purchase case.

I don’t understand how RBS can call its system online if what brokers input does not go straight to its computer.

There’s a delay of two days before cases are keyed in, then a further delay of eight working days before an underwriter looks at a case.

And McGeehan is right about RBS’ communications too. Its tracking system is abysmal and does not reflect the status of cases. This is not what you would expect from one of the UK’s largest banks.

So a straightforward case submitted online more than five weeks ago on a purchase with no chain could not complete on the required day. Is this treating customers fairly? I don’t think so.

I phoned up to try to complain but could not find anyone but call centre staff to speak to, once I had waited 25 minutes to be connected in the first place.

As for BDMs, mine’s always having to help out on the phones and field managers are as much use as chocolate fireguards – when the going gets hot, they melt away.

So I don’t feel like an intermediary partner because partners should be kept informed and be supported.

In fact, I feel more like an intermediary pawn as my clients are still governed by interest rates rather than service levels.

Perhaps the next time the FSA looks at how companies apply TCF it should scrutinise big players that promise one thing in their TV advertisements and provide something different to brokers who introduce business to them.

John Smith
Jonathan Blake Money Management