PL
Patrick L
Active since Oct 2011
33
Reviews
0
Industries
Reviews
33 reviews49 months ago
Yet Another Standard Bank Failure (With Added Rudeness)
I wrote to the Standard Bank "homencar" email address twice (on 15/03 and again on 23/03) requesting full tax year (i.e., 01/03/2021 to 28/02/2022, inclusive) statements for two home loans. Autoreplies were received for both of these requests (06884235 and 07236187). To date, no meaning action whatsoever in this matter has been forthcoming from Standard Bank. This deliberate disregard of a legitimate and reasonable request is both ill-mannered and unacceptable. Please see to it that this matter is addressed ASAP. Finally, note that this matter is to be dealt with BY EMAIL ONLY. I will not accept any other means of communication, least of all any phone calls because Standard Bank's call centre agents are far too often totally ineffectual and lack the most basic language and comprehension skills.
74 replies
52 months ago
Automatic Home Loan Instalment Recalculation Not Working
Until the most recent “upgrades” to the Banking App and Internet Banking platform, it used to be the case that the monthly home loan instalment was recalculated overnight whenever a withdrawal or deposit was made from or into an access bond. This is no longer done. Why? This deficiency has led to the absurd situation where an outstanding home loan balance of R63.48 has a minimum monthly instalment of R3,297.72 with 35 months to go at an interest rate of 5.75% per annum. Please note that this issue is one of general principle, not about any specific cases, namely that the automatic instalment recalculation process is no longer working. Therefore, I have no desire to enter into any pointless to-and-fro about this matter, and the cellphone number supplied below is fake. All I want from you is that you bring this problem to the attention of Standard Bank’s Head of Home Loans so that they can fix it ASAP.
328 replies
54 months ago
Standard Bank is a money-grubbing psychopath
There is a deduction dated 02 November 2021 against my Elite current account labelled “Honouring fee” in the amount of R132.00. It appears that this is some sort of penalty for allegedly not having sufficient funds to cover a debit order for a home loan and/or a monthly fee debit. This is outrageous larceny for two reasons: 1. The debit order strike date for the home loan is the last day of the month. 30 October is not the last day of October, which has 31 days. Also, there were sufficient funds in the account to cover the monthly fee. Given Standard Bank’s antediluvian and asinine practice of not processing banking transactions on Sundays and public holidays, if the last day of the month is a Sunday or holiday, the debit order strike date should move to the next working day, in this case 02 November. 2. Records will show that I transferred more than ample funds into my current account at around 19:15 on 30 October, at least two hours BEFORE the debit strike occurred. Thus, any claim that there were insufficient funds are provably incorrect. Consequently, I demand a full refund, a written apology from Standard Bank, and an undertaking to avoid a recurrence of this unconscionable act of avarice. Note: Do NOT call me. The cell no. provided here is bogus. Correspond by e-mail.
53 replies
55 months ago
Does the one hand even know what the other is doing?
A few days ago, I received an SMS reminding me that my Cheque Card will expire in January next year, and to confirm the delivery address for a replacement using the Banking App, which I use frequently. There's just one small problem: I cannot find anywhere among the App's many features where I can confirm or update a delivery address. So, please be so kind as to inform me of how to go about doing what the SMS requests with the absolute minimum of fuss. I do NOT want to be told that I have to visit a branch because, after all, we're living in the 3rd decade of the 21st century and COVID is all around us.
106 replies
58 months ago
Mendacious and Ham-fisted
Despite numerous past assurances from this obviously untrustworthy, leech-ridden maggot magnet that my details have been removed from its systems, I am still receiving SMS communications. Today, it's from Multiply Money about POPIA. What part of "I want you grubby vampires out of my life permanently and irrevocably" is giving you trouble?! I have zero business with you, don't ever want any again, and haven't had any for several years now. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO MY PERSONAL DATA!!! Any permission you think you might have is hereby officially revoked in its entirety. I demand that you remove any and all trace of me from your systems with immediate effect, or face the consequences of your unlawful conduct. You have been warned.
106 replies
59 months ago
Discovery is a Serial Ethical Failure
On 05/06/2021, my wife and I entertained some guests at our home. Five days later, on 10/06/2021, we were informed that one of them had tested positive for COVID-19. Upon learning this, we immediately arranged for a PCR swab test (the most reliable) in order to assess our own status. We thought this was the responsible, sane thing to do but Discovery obviously has some other ideas, given subsequent events. The next day, on 11/06/2021, we proceeded to be tested and I submitted a claim to Discovery online, since I had been told at the testing station that the medical aid would cover at least a portion of the testing costs, which came to R1,700.00 in total. But Discovery is a craven, insatiable maw of avarice, bereft of all decency and conscience in these trying times of COVID-19. Not only did it take Discovery an unacceptable length of time to assess the claim, it also rejected the claim in totality. Meanwhile, Discovery exercises vile hypocrisy by sending out SMS notifications about how to behave responsibly in respect of COVID-19. Trying to encourage people to behave in a certain way while expecting them to foot the entire bill for responsible action it has itself encouraged is the manipulative conduct of a narcissistic psychopath. Discovery has sunk to a new low, one from which it will struggle to recover from in our estimation. No doubt, Discovery’s unconscionable handling of this matter will be defended by citing “rules” and “policies” and “procedures” as if such were actually persuasive. Discovery’s clients have ZERO input into such rules etc,, and they are not negotiable. That’s more psychopathic conduct right there, and rigid inflexibility is the hallmark of petty, wannabe dictators. Besides, we have very little interest in the smug, self-serving bunkum Discovery will no doubt serve up in its futile attempts to defend the indefensible. So don’t even bother contacting us, see? Instead, we will be shopping around for a more accommodating service provider, slim as those pickings might be.
212 replies
60 months ago
Where is my STANLIB account?
I have a STANLIB portfolio linked to my Standard Bank profiles, both for Internet Banking and the Banking App. STANLIB recently made some changes to its funds offerings and this resulted in changes to my portfolio. Specifically, two of my fund accounts were closed and removed from my portfolio, and the moneys from these transferred into a newly created account. I can see all of my STANLIB accounts (there are four active ones) on the Banking App but not on the Internet Banking platform where I can only see three. The newly-created account ("STANLIB Equity Fund R") is not showing. Note that my portfolio contains two separate "STANLIB Equity Fund R" accounts. Please fix it ASAP so that I can see all of my STANLIB accounts on both the Banking App and the Internet Banking platform. Thank you.
106 replies
60 months ago
It can be—but not this way!
Here is one spectacular example of how Standard Bank (SB) shoots itself in the foot with red-taped, .45-calibre bureaucracy: Every year in the past, we were automatically e-mailed around mid-March a full-year home loan statement for the previous tax year (01 March to end February). This year, this did not happen, so we enquired about it using SB’s online enquiry facility (because SB had deactivated the “homeservemailbox” e-mail address without telling its clients). It took SB 17 days to respond. In itself, such a long delay is flatly unacceptable. It should happen within a day or two! But it gets better. The response asks us to provide a variety of details about the home loan, supposedly for “security purposes.” Hilarious! SB has all of our details on record, including the e-mail address to which all previous home loan statements have been sent without any need for us to provide any “security purposes” info. So why now suddenly? All that’s needed is to check on whether the info provided in the enquiry (account holder name, ID no., contact nos. and e-mail address) is the same as those associated with the home loan on SB’s system. Does SB really think that the info provided is fake while agreeing 100% with what’s on its own systems? Because that’s the absurd implication of this inanity. It is precisely this sort of inept inefficiency, giving clients an utterly pointless run-around, and consequently subjecting them to unreasonable delays and frustration, that ensures people will hold banks in low regard. Finally, whoever is handling this, don’t contact us at all. Just bring this matter to the attention of someone with sufficient savvy and clout to understand the ludicrousness of this state of affairs, and to fix it. Do not dare tell us about “standard procedures” or such because you will only get an earful of abuse if you do. Don't say you weren’t warned.
53 replies
68 months ago
Standard Bank is Flouting ECTA!
Standard Bank keeps sending me promotional emails that include an “Unsubscribe” facility THAT DOES NOT WORK! The spam emails come from “information(at)standardbank(dot)co(dot)za” and include an instruction at the bottom that says to send an email to “Unsubscribe(at)standardbank(dot)co(dot)za” to unsubscribe. I have done so three times already but the spam keeps on coming regardless. Please note that these spam emails constitute “unsolicited commercial communication” in terms of Section 45 of SA’s Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (ECTA). Please note further that Standard Bank’s messages do not comply with Section 45(1)(a), which requires that Standard Bank provides the consumer with an option to cancel their subscription to the relevant mailing list. Since the method provided does not work, Standard Bank is therefore committing an offence in terms of Section 45(3), and liable upon conviction to penalties, as set out in Section 89(1). I trust the above is sufficiently clear: Standard Bank is breaking the law, and could face sanctions as a result. Please note that I have no wish whatsoever to enter into any correspondence with Standard Bank concerning this issue. The contact number I have provided here is therefore fictitious. All Standard Bank has to do is to include a properly functioning “Unsubscribe” mechanism in the body of its communications so that these comply with legal requirements as per ECTA.
53 replies
68 months ago
Barefaced Exploitation—Second Attempt!
How on Earth can Standard Bank possibly justify a service fee of R246.00 for a cash deposit into my current account by a third party, as was done on 27 August 2020 around 11:00?! This is just the type of unconscionable greed and usurious grubbery that causes people to disdain banks and to hold them in the utmost contempt! For the most part, a deposit transaction is computerised and requires minimal human effort to mediate it. This makes the fee Standard Bank charges all the more debauched; and even more especially so, given the lockdown circumstances and its attendant job losses that SA finds itself burdened with at present. I demand a proper and complete explanation for why the fee for such a transaction is not capped at, say, R50.00, failing which explanation, a full refund is the only decent thing Standard Bank can possibly do to make adequate restitution for such a shamelessly larcenous imposition. Please also note that I have no wish whatsoever to enter into any telephonic correspondence with Standard Bank concerning this issue. The contact number I have provided here is therefore fictitious, and only email correspondence is acceptable.
53 replies
Review Distribution
5 Star
0 (0%)
4 Star
0 (0%)
3 Star
0 (0%)
2 Star
9 (27.272727272727273%)
1 Star
24 (72.72727272727273%)