A year later, he complained to the bank that it had not issued a letter of demand and had, in fact, told him it would not take debt collection action while he was recovering from his accident. He also said the bank had given no notice of closing his accounts. The bank acknowledged it could have emailed the letter of demand to him after he said he had moved addresses, and also that it could have notified him in writing that it would be closing his accounts and given a closure date. It offered Carlos $500, an offer he declined. He wanted more compensation and the debt written off.
After reviewing the bank’s diary notes, letters and phone calls, we were satisfied the bank had issued the demand notice to the address shown on its records. We agreed with the bank that it could have used another way to communicate with Carlos, but we were satisfied from the phone calls that Carlos was aware of the letter’s contents. Also, Carlos twice confirmed to the bank after it had issued the letter of demand that he lived at the address to which it had sent the letter.
The phone calls also showed the bank had never promised not to take debt collection activity against him. The bank made it clear during those calls that it intended taking debt collection activity and let him know the steps it was taking, including closing his accounts. The bank could have confirmed in writing that it was closing his accounts and when, but the phone calls gave him plenty of time to find another bank. We suggested he accept the bank’s offer.
We did not uphold the complaint. Carlos accepted the bank's offer.Print this page