Back in January this year I was trying to decide which app-based bank I wanted to join and I opened accounts at both Monzo and Starling.
Ultimately I chose Starling so I closed the Monzo account. I admit my credit rating isn’t great, but it’s been steadily improving for the past year or so and has even improved to the point where I’ve successfully applied for a second credit card recently.
After I closed the Monzo account, I opened an account with Revolut as well to handle my regular payments but I’m at a point now where I want to ger away from Revolut so I tried to come back to Monzo.
I started the application process and found that they had retained my phone number so I got in touch and asked them if it was correct and if they could ‘release’ it so I could re-apply again.
I got a reply that stated that I couldn’t open an account. A strange response considering I’d asked about a phone number
Subsequent emails went back and forth and I was told in no uncertain terms that I couldn’t have an account, the decision was final and they weren’t going to tell me why.
I’d read someone claiming that if you’d held an account with Monzo and closed it that you couldn’t then re-apply for a minimum period of 12 months, and I’m wondering if this is true ?. It would certainly explain why they’ve slammed the door shut.
1 Like
Anarchist
(Press ‘Help’ search ‘Contact us’ or email help@monzo.com or call 0800 802 1281)
3
I think that might be true for Starling. I don’t believe that Monzo are quite so open about their policies.
It can’t be a month for Monzo because I closed the account in early January.
I know my credit rating isn’t great but it’s actually improved significantly since I had the Monzo account back then - I was approved for a new credit card after a hard search just last month.
I’ve also been denied an account with Monese as well - the same Monese who make a point of saying they will give an account to almost anyone regardless of credit rating, status or even address details.
I ended up doing a CIFAS search because I was so confused as to why I was having all of these doors slammed shut and that came back clear.
So unless I find out otherwise, I’m still firmly of the belief that I won’t be able to rejoin Monzo until January next year.
This was never part of Monzo terms I believe. Starling works in this way.
It used to be 30 days by memory. (I don’t deal with opening account).
When reapplying for account, a review is carried out to assess whether reopening an account is possible, and unfortunately on this occasion it’s not been successful.
As with most, if not all banks, they aren’t obliged to disclose the reasons why this is.
Have you considered Chase? Rather up and coming (if they get it right).
I always drift to check out others but Monzo has a hold that won’t let go (not because they salary me), it’s just a great app over all. Starling is the other, mostly recent due to the joint account being held there for now.
I do actually have an application pending with Chase, although I’m in their “waiting room” so it could be any time within the next 5 weeks apparently.
I’ve accepted I won’t be able to rejoin Monzo but I just can’t accept it’s because of “criteria”. My criteria were good enough to open accounts with Monzo, Starling AND Revolut back in January so they should be more than good enough to rejoin Monzo now.
Could have a 999 Experian score, same credit card for the past 30 years, paid in full every month, nothing else, and still not be eligible for every offering on the market.
Each has their own risk appetite and preferable customer base.
As for Revolut, they’re not a bank, and I can’t imagine their checks are as thorough as the banks. Could argue it’s all a soft check, fine, but there’s probably more to it.
In short, no, I have a good idea why this is, along with other unknown mysteries floating in the community universe but it’s not for the Joe Public, they just need to accept their losses and (sadly) move on.
It is one of those instances.
This is true, and not fitting the eligibility criteria is the specific answer in response to this.
There’s no harm in pushing back and asking for more detail but I don’t think there’s any obligation to go into fine detail.
Of course, there’s always a complaint if people remain dissatisfied, but can’t imagine that overturns any decisions (me and Barclays have been in this fight for many years).
Then the eligibility criteria have clearly been changed and significantly toughened up in the 24-odd weeks since I opened an account.
Which clearly isn’t the case …
As I said in the opening post, their response was basically “our decision is final and we’re not going to tell you why”.
Well said and of course I’m going to agree. Surely the idea is that you want customers for your company rather than arbitrarily rejecting them and subsequently refusing to tell them why or even discuss why - same goes with Monese.
Where’s the harm in “Well we rejected you because X so if you can correct/improve that then we’d be happy to have you”.
Path to Apple is basically like any other bank referring you to check your credit score and work out what’s wrong, which Credit Karma, Experian and ClearScore all show you how to do and what to do in the same manner.
There’s no tick box for Apple to say oop yep they passed our defined test; they’re generalised tips to get you where you need to be; at most a gimmick to make themselves look good when actually this information is everywhere.
Lower your credit utilisation
Pay off old debts
Don’t apply for credit
Very simple but also very effective impact on doing these things.
There’s no proof in the pudding for this.
Someone with the exact same score; history; so forth, but didn’t close their account and is new to bank, would quite possibly be accepted, as you were in January.
But as you closed yours; it’s not possible to reopen it or apply for a new one based on their response. It’s not uncommon for businesses to do this.
Tesco Mobile apparently banned me years ago for complaining (not tried to return since, I won a long ongoing complaint).
Very different to banking yes, but it’s a business decision and should just be final.
So be it, on to the next.
This is a fine reason why some things are better left unsaid, or kept where they need to be, not solely to protect the bank, but customers alike who are also impacted by the effects of these things.
Whilst I feel this approach is useful, it’s also leading a customer into defined credit decisions, and maybe American rules are different to the UK rules in what can and can’t be said.
Some companies could just prefer to be open, and maybe Apple can afford their losses for being so open, whilst on the other end of the scale, smaller companies cannot justify these potential costs, leaks, or whatever else, as the impact doesnt just hit the bank, it most likely falls down to customer base which not many want
I think what irks me the most about the Monzo situation was the phone call.
Me: “Just wanted to check if it was correct that you still had my phone number on file even though I closed the account in January”
Them: “You can’t have an account”
Me: “Wait, what?”
Personally, that’s why I think there was some kind of ‘flag’ on my details.
If it was either a flag triggered by newer, tougher qualifying criteria or it was a flag triggered by the fact I closed an account so can’t rejoin, I’ll clearly never find out but the speed in which they told me I can’t have an account after I got in touch about a phone number clearly suggests some kind of flag or marker was already in place.
I suspect monzo is struggling with risk. Their credit offering is anaemic anyway. There have been well documented hires to try and sort out the lending book. Consumer current accounts all in are pretty low risk, so there’s a legitimate question mark over a business that flags/blocks a lot of accounts. Given this has been a recurring theme, I don’t think it’s a one-off situation.
Maybe since they’ve failed to enter the mass credit market (where banks make money…), they have had to retrench with tougher criteria.
