Might as well just get rid of income requirements and plop a monthly/annual fee on these accounts like Amex did with Platinum. Doesn’t sound that exclusive and keeping up the pretence just so that the middle class can feel important is pointless
5 Likes
That article is wrong about one small detail.
It mentions that a large cash withdrawal limit of £1,000 per day is a key perk of Premier, compared to the “standard limit of £300”.
Actually, everyone can increase their limit from £300 to £500 in the app.
This doesn’t ring true either:
[Barclays] said that fewer customers were phoning them during the pandemic
2 Likes
Do you think that Barclays didn’t say that or that they did and lied about it?
They must have said it, but I personally assume it’s based off some unusual measurement rather than simply number of calls.
Every other company reported rising calls during the pandemic, and quite significantly, as people suffered various difficulties and needed help and also switched to phone from other channels as social distancing hit in-person interaction.
My guess is it’s counting calls to premier banking managers specifically and not general queries or all calls.
2 Likes
When I read it I assumed they were referring to a lack of calls to the premier customer lines, not the whole bank. That’s why they cut the service.
4 Likes
Yeah, that’s what I meant.
Presumably the premier-specific line is all they were counting.
That doesn’t mean that premier customers weren’t still calling, necessarily - they may have been dialling a different line specifically for financial difficulties, say, to ask for a payment holiday.
1 Like
The premier specific phone lines could not really do anything. They gave out specific information and then could make appointments or transfer again to current accounts, wealth, mortgages, Barclaycard etc. So it is not a loss given that they were useless presalesmen.
Have you been to Barclays branches recently? The premier lounges are gone, most counters are gone, and things replaced by a welcome person with a tablet and lots of indoor ATMs with higher deposit & withdrawal limits and additional self service tasks. Only a single counter that is Jack of all trades, mostly verifying identity for people who lost their cards & access to pinsentry.
No FX desks, one has to order currency online.
If one wants telephone service one should dial First Direct.
2 Likes
That’s what I had guessed, and perhaps it is no wonder that calls to those fell if they were primarily about “sales” of products, as that was the last thing most customers would have been worried about (taking on new products during a time, for many, of financial hardship).
I just found it very unusual, given what we’ve heard from other companies, so suspected Barclays of being selective in what data they were reporting.
1 Like
To be fair: it seems to make sense to me: if you want to look at whether to close the premier specific phone line, you look at how many people call he premier specific phone line.
Seems perfectly sensible to me 
1 Like
So apparently when Barclays do a fincrime investigation they make it seem like all your funds are gone & you’re massively overdrawn to “safeguard funds” in the account?
Can they not just freeze accounts? Surely this is not right as I’ve never heard of such things
5 Likes
Something about that doesn’t add up at all, they must be able to freeze accounts.
They also can’t safeguard “your” approved overdraft money as that is Barclays’ money, not yours.
This just sounds like a variation on the classic “safe account” scam, possibly with internal help.
It reminds me of this:
Edit: Reading it properly, the use of the word “reconcile” leads me to believe that Barclays are claiming the full available balance on the account, to offset money owing. This might happen if somebody had mistakenly (for example) credited £50,000 to the their account which was otherwise only £10 in credit. The customer may then have withdrawn all £50,010 from the account, and when Barclays come to reclaim the money they find an account with a zero balance. They would, in that instance, use the overdraft to claim the money back as it wasn’t rightfully the account holder’s. If this process has gone wrong (or even been fraudulently abused by a rogue Barclays employee) then you could see how the poster’s situation may have arisen.
I’d assume that such a thing happening would be extremely rare, however, so I am a bit sceptical about what has been posted and whether it is really the full story.
Have we learned nothing in believing random people on a forum?!
7 Likes
Banks cannot move money out of your account without a police or court order, as far as I understand. The story doesn’t add up.
4 Likes
Touché
Although it sounds plausible enough with funds being returned and the bank not saying anything about why it happened – both in this case, and in the case reported in the news linked on MSE
1 Like
Anyone have an rbs credit card? I have a dd in full but sometimes prefer to just get it paid - if I did so via transfer would the dd adjust to £0 - anyone got any experience?
You’d have to check how many days you have to pay it as some say if you pay less than 5 working days or so before the DD is taken it may not adjust,
1 Like
Due in 25 days
Each bank processes differently so you’d have to check with them at what point if you made a manual payment would it not amend your direct debit, and in most instances only reflects those who pay minimum, if you pay a fixed, it’ll generally take the higher in my experience.
1 Like
It’s a full payment I’d be looking to make - but the DD is set up to take the full amount too. Guess I could pay it off and cancel the DD.
1 Like
It may amend, not worth cancelling the direct debit as you may use the card and forget to pay it.
Better to pay in full by direct debit anyway naturally as it reports paid in full on your credit file.
Edit: only your creditor will know exactly what will happen, so drop them a message.
1 Like