UBS - Whiter than a White Lie?

Back in 2005, I contracted to UBS in London on a Sarbanes-Oxley (risk/governance) remediation project.  Part of the recruitment process was that Kroll Worldwide would run a background check on my CV.

Kroll asked me to clarify what I'd been doing for a period of only a few weeks' gap in part of my CV.  Penna Meridian, the outsourcing company Merrill Lynch engaged as part of my redundancy package in my previous role with them, had emphasised the importance of showing continuity of employment and had advised me to offer any explanation other than 'looking for work' - they recommended that I should say something like I'd been on holiday.

This I duly did, telling Kroll that I'd returned briefly to Australia to visit family and friends - thinking that would be the end of it.  It wasn't.  They came back again seeking a statement from someone who knew me confirming this.  Rather than perpetuate the lie or embroil anyone else in my innocent deception, I put my hands up and explained that I'd been acting on professional advice.

UBS's HR department later contacted me to say that I could never work for them again in any capacity - albeit that they called me back the following year for Phase II of the project.

Although I subsequently contracted to Bank of New York Mellon, I've now been out of work for some considerable time and I occasionally wonder if that minor indiscretion led to me being blackballed by other City employers.

My point is, while my role at UBS ironically helped to put a monitoring framework in place to provide greater transparency and establish internal ownership of specialised investment vehicles, someone as diligent as me was passed over while those who later went on to fix Libor rates or otherwise engaged in fraudulent activities made the cut.

Yes, I'm bitter - and I'm frankly disgusted that more bankers aren't in jail.

Dear Bank Manager (Part 2)

As you haven't responded to my last idea, can you please qualify why whole countries are going down the pan - and the UK itself is living beyond its means - yet you treat us like some sort of criminals for struggling to make up the payment shortfall you've imposed on us with your latest mortgage rate increases? [which, incidentally, became 'necessary' as a direct result of your own recklessness].


Using your threats to exercise your charge over our home as the standard strategy for debt recovery, who would take possession of Greece e.g. when their debt mountain collapses? - where would a whole nation be expected to live?  And why can Governments be bailed out with rescue plans spanning years yet you're already getting trigger happy about what might only be a couple of months arrears?

You seem to have abandoned most of the factors previously taken into account when assessing someone's risk profile and focused entirely on capacity to repay.  In our case, you're not exposed while we have around 50% equity in our home and, despite my continuing inability to find work, I've held some responsible and well paid positions in the past and my prospects are still good.

You also don't seem to grasp that, if you realise on your security, that will be one less loan accumulating interest for you in a market where you're already having trouble getting rid of the stuff.  But that shouldn't change the outcome much - as soon as I find work again, you'll lose my business anyway for failing to be as loyal to me as I've been to you.

You need to get back to basics and stop pigeonholing people - understand your customer and use some common sense.

You're not quite off the hook yet, Santander

After our action group had a win over Santander in their attempt to hoodwink us on Business Banking charges, you'd think I'd be done with beating them up for a while.

Not so.  From tomorrow, they intend to inflict more pain on 400,000 mortgage customers by increasing their standard variable rate ('SVR') by half a percent to 4.74%.  Oh, and yet again, they've reneged on a promise - that the SVR will be never be more than 3.75 percentage points above the Bank Rate - by raising the cap.  The words 'guarantee' and 'promise' obviously don't translate well into Spanish.

Their reason?  They say 'the cost of providing mortgages has risen over the past three years'.  And why?  Because of the 'need to meet tighter regulatory demands, which in part require them to build up a bigger capital buffer'.

The irony is killing.  Why has governance made organisations such as these so top heavy cost-wise in the first place?  Because they couldn't be trusted to give their clients a fair deal on their own.  You can you imagine the contempt they must have held for investors and borrowers alike, to have to be TOLD to treat them fairly - isn't the first rule of business to build trust and goodwill with your customers if you want them to come back?

Coming from the days when retail banking was a profession I proudly represented as a regional manager in Australia, I've now become totally disillusioned with the banks.  Instead of putting service first, they bombard us with reams of the small print that we all fought to eliminate a few decades ago (whatever became of the 'Crystal Mark'?), in which they disguise strategies deliberately calculated to catch us all out at some time or another - just ask any small investor who, perversely, has to change banks every year if they want to avoid an automatic rollover offering only fractions of a percent.  As BBC Watchdog pointed out, they actually rely on us not to check the anniversary of our investments in the hope that we don't notice.  Not to mention their heavy sales techniques (driven by target not need, as evidenced by recent mis-selling scandals).

Now, I can't understand why the banks aren't making money.  Back in 'my day', banks and building societies could lend out around ten times the amount they held on deposit, on the basis that not everyone would want to draw on their investments at the same time.  So why, when the investments they're offering paltry returns on can generate multiple parcels of borrowing at a higher rate, are they crying poor?  Could it be something to do with needing to replenish the coffers of the investment arms they so irresponsibly decimated? - and which they are now so reluctant to separate from their high street business?

Make no mistake - Joe Average is paying for 'The 1%' to shaft him again and again.  Someone pass the KY.

When does 'Free Banking Forever' mean at least £7.50 mth?

We seem to have a new bank mis-selling scandal on the horizon.

We received a letter today stating that Santander will start charging on a "Free Business Banking Forever" account we opened back in 2003.

Marketeers seem to have a problem with vocabulary - like internet providers and mobile companies' interpretation of the word 'unlimited'!

 
Don't let them get away with it - I have the evidence in black and white from when we opened the account - call Santander on 0845 606 1721 and lodge a telephone complaint. We’ll be taking it up with the Financial Ombudsman if they don't back down. Enough complaints will hopefully force a re-think, although the Financial Services Authority’s (‘FSA’) Lord Turner has ruled that free banking has to end as it “stifles competition”.  Really?  Is free not competitive?

If we can’t win against the FSA, then perhaps class action is called for through the courts.

Who's with me?

[Would also refer you to this Facebook group - not set up by me]

[Tell BBC's Watchdog about it here - choose 'Finance' in the drop-down box or Rip Off Britain here]

Petition here. 

ANOTHER broken pledge (this time on mortgage rates) here.

... and did you know the sort code of their business accounts ends in '666'? I just put that in for mischief - I don't actually believe they are: ... (look closely at the logo) ....

 
Update 23 Aug 12: Just spoke to Ralph Tetlow (Santander Exec Complaint Team Manager - Tel: 01908 934552) to give him a right of reply before escalating my complaint to FOS. I said their written response did not address why they don't think they mis-sold - only to say they were sorry I felt they had. He insists their Legal department says the changes are in accordance with the T&C's.  I imagine, though, that Legal have looked at these in isolation and not in the context of the marketing campaign used to promote the product. Keep the pressure on them - call him, join the FB groups, go to Watchdog, Tweet like there's no tomorrow!!!

Update 6 Sep 12: RESULT!!! Santander have backed off - Reported in HuffPost here. 

Indie Authors - Separating the Wheat from the Chaff

The world of books is changing.  The recession has seen publishing houses less willing to take a punt on new authors and instead choosing to stick with established names or prostituting themselves with the latest celebrity offerings.

No wonder so many writers are turning indie as, with the advent of Kindle and 'Print on Demand' tools, they're able to reach a vast audience without having to relinquish a slice of their income to either the publishers themselves or the increasingly irrelevant agents the industry still insists on using as go-betweens.

But the downside of this ease of DIY publishing is that the market is becoming flooded with dross, making it more difficult for real talent to rise to the surface.  Quality is being stifled by the sheer weight of titles a potential buyer has to trawl through, often leading to disappointment in the choices they make.

A case in point - this British chicklit author's three books all carry 5*star ratings/reviews but are currently languishing in Amazon bookstore's mid-division amidst a tide of free or have-a-go wannabe titles, due to Amazon's woefully inadequate classification system - amateur pornography sits incongruously next to legitimate romance novels and Amazon doesn't even have anything as straightforward as a 'chicklit' category.

So, while I can't offer advice on how to find that shiny needle in the Amazon haystack, I can at least offer you some tips on how to differentiate the good from the bad and the downright ugly before you commit to making a purchase you might regret:

- Try before you buy.  Most titles on Amazon will give you access to a preview by allowing you to click on the book icon to 'Look Inside'.

- Establish the writer's pedigree.  Look at their star rating, reviews and if they have more than one book in the stable or whether they're just one trick ponies (that said, all writers need to start somewhere, so don't be too dismissive of a debut novel).

- Use social media tools like Twitter or Facebook, or book forums, to seek recommendations from friends or like-minded readers.

- Look for writers with a coherent marketing strategy and read their blogs and web pages to get a further insight of the personality behind the book.

Happy reading!

Please feel free to comment or add your own suggestions.