Best of luck with it, and well done of persevering.
Bunq (and others?) - banks paying different interest rates to depositors of different EU countries
- Thread starter podgerodge
- Start date
podgerodge
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,061
CONCLUSION - @Brendan Burgess @Freelance @NoRegretsCoyote
I didn't get any further. I guess I have to be happy that they increased the Irish % in line with the Dutch rate. Perhaps I might have got further if I insisted that I lost as a result of the original practice. It's overall quite weak that Kifid think Bunq adding some words, but leaving "rules and regulations" in, is sufficient. Anyway, game over!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary
Treatability. Interest in the proceedings. The consumer has a savings account with the bank. At the time the complaint was filed, the bank offered its Irish customers a lower interest rate than its Dutch customers. Although the consumer understands that the bank may and can offer different interest rates, he does not agree with the reason given by the bank for this. He demands that the bank adjust the text on its website as proposed by him. The committee rules that the consumer no longer has an interest in his claim now that the bank has increased the interest rate for Irish customers with a savings deposit during the written phase of the Kifid procedure to the interest rate that applies to Dutch customers and has also changed the text on the website.
1. Procedure
1.1 The committee handling the case, hereinafter referred to as the committee, decides on the basis of the regulations and on the basis of the documents submitted to Kifid by the parties, including appendices. These are: 1) the consumer's complaint form; 2) the additional documents from the consumer; 3) the bank's statement of defence; 4) the consumer's reply; 5) the additional documents of the consumer and the bank; 6) the bank's rejoinder.
1.2 The committee is of the opinion that it is not necessary to hear the case orally. The case will therefore be decided on the basis of the documents.
1.3 The parties have opted for a binding opinion. This means that they can hold each other to the decision.
2. The dispute
What happened?
2.1 The consumer holds a savings account with the bank. As an Irish customer of the bank, he initially received a lower interest rate on the savings he held with the bank
(1.56%) than customers in the Netherlands, France and Germany (2.46%).
2.2 On its website, the bank explained why it offers different interest rates to customers living in different countries:
“Why do MassInterest rates vary in different countries?
We strive to offer our users the most competitive interest in all countries. Each country has its own set of rules and regulations (for example regarding taxes), resulting in different interest rates across Europe. As a bank we need to comply with those rules, which is why we maintain different interest rates in the Netherlands, Germany, France and other countries.”
2.3 On 7 December 2023, the bank increased the interest rate for its Irish customers from 1.56% to 2.46%. From that moment on, the interest rate for Irish customers with a savings account is the same as the interest rate that the bank offers to its Dutch, German and French customers.
2.4 On 21 December 2023, the bank informed Kifid that it had adjusted the text on its website:
“Why do MassInterest rates vary in different countries?
We strive to offer our users a competitive interest in all countries where we operate. Each country has its own set of rules, regulations and market conditions which result in different interest rates across Europe. The country where you are resident determines which of bunq’s rates applies to you.”
The complaint and claim
2.5 The consumer demands that the Commission determines that the bank must adjust the statement about the
differences in interest rates on its website and other channels.
According to the consumer, the bank’s statement was incorrect, misleading and
non-transparent. In this way, the bank pretends that different interest rates are offered
as a result of legislation and regulations in countries of the European Union. The consumer states that the differences in interest rates are
only caused by market conditions and that the bank must adjust its statement on the website
accordingly. Even after the text has been adjusted, the consumer does not agree
with the content of the statement given by the bank and demands that the bank removes the words
rules and regulations from the text. The defence
2.6 The bank has defended itself against the consumer's claims. Where relevant, the committee will address this in its assessment.
3. The assessment
What should the committee judge?
3.1 The core of the dispute is whether the bank must adjust the text on its website as suggested by the consumer.
3.2 As the most far-reaching defence, the bank has invoked article 3:303 of the Civil Code (BW) and stated that the consumer no longer has an interest in his claim now that the bank has (i) increased the interest rate for its Irish customers to 2.46%1 and (ii) the bank has adjusted the text on its website. Before the committee can start the substantive handling of the consumer's complaint, it will first have to deal with this formal defence. If this defence is successful, the committee will not start the substantive handling of the complaint.
3.3 Following the bank's defence, the consumer has requested the committee to assess the complaint at the time he submitted it to Kifid. Legal framework 3.4 The Supreme Court has ruled that an objection, appeal or (incidental) appeal must be declared inadmissible if the person submitting the legal remedy has no interest in it. According to the Supreme Court, this is the case if the use of the legal remedy cannot put him in a better position, the consumer has no interest in his claim
3.5 The first thing to note is that the consumer did have an interest in submitting his complaint at the time the complaint was filed. However, this does not affect the fact that his interest has lapsed as a result of the interest rate increase and the adjustment of the text on the website. Since the consumer has only requested adjustment of the text on the website and he has not stated nor has it been demonstrated that he has suffered damage, the committee rules that the consumer cannot be put in a better position than is currently the case if the claim is allowed. In view of this, the committee concludes that under these circumstances the consumer no longer has an interest in a ruling on the adjustment of the text on the website.5 In view of the above, the committee will not grant the consumer's request to assess the complaint at the time he filed the complaint.
Conclusion
3.6 The conclusion is that the consumer no longer has an interest in his claim because it cannot put him in a better position. The committee will therefore not proceed to the substantive handling of the complaint.
4. The decision
The committee declares the complaint inadmissible.
This decision was established on 8 August 2024 and taken by Mr. F.H.E. Boerma as
chairman with Mr. A. Kanhai as secretary.
I didn't get any further. I guess I have to be happy that they increased the Irish % in line with the Dutch rate. Perhaps I might have got further if I insisted that I lost as a result of the original practice. It's overall quite weak that Kifid think Bunq adding some words, but leaving "rules and regulations" in, is sufficient. Anyway, game over!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary
Treatability. Interest in the proceedings. The consumer has a savings account with the bank. At the time the complaint was filed, the bank offered its Irish customers a lower interest rate than its Dutch customers. Although the consumer understands that the bank may and can offer different interest rates, he does not agree with the reason given by the bank for this. He demands that the bank adjust the text on its website as proposed by him. The committee rules that the consumer no longer has an interest in his claim now that the bank has increased the interest rate for Irish customers with a savings deposit during the written phase of the Kifid procedure to the interest rate that applies to Dutch customers and has also changed the text on the website.
1. Procedure
1.1 The committee handling the case, hereinafter referred to as the committee, decides on the basis of the regulations and on the basis of the documents submitted to Kifid by the parties, including appendices. These are: 1) the consumer's complaint form; 2) the additional documents from the consumer; 3) the bank's statement of defence; 4) the consumer's reply; 5) the additional documents of the consumer and the bank; 6) the bank's rejoinder.
1.2 The committee is of the opinion that it is not necessary to hear the case orally. The case will therefore be decided on the basis of the documents.
1.3 The parties have opted for a binding opinion. This means that they can hold each other to the decision.
2. The dispute
What happened?
2.1 The consumer holds a savings account with the bank. As an Irish customer of the bank, he initially received a lower interest rate on the savings he held with the bank
(1.56%) than customers in the Netherlands, France and Germany (2.46%).
2.2 On its website, the bank explained why it offers different interest rates to customers living in different countries:
“Why do MassInterest rates vary in different countries?
We strive to offer our users the most competitive interest in all countries. Each country has its own set of rules and regulations (for example regarding taxes), resulting in different interest rates across Europe. As a bank we need to comply with those rules, which is why we maintain different interest rates in the Netherlands, Germany, France and other countries.”
2.3 On 7 December 2023, the bank increased the interest rate for its Irish customers from 1.56% to 2.46%. From that moment on, the interest rate for Irish customers with a savings account is the same as the interest rate that the bank offers to its Dutch, German and French customers.
2.4 On 21 December 2023, the bank informed Kifid that it had adjusted the text on its website:
“Why do MassInterest rates vary in different countries?
We strive to offer our users a competitive interest in all countries where we operate. Each country has its own set of rules, regulations and market conditions which result in different interest rates across Europe. The country where you are resident determines which of bunq’s rates applies to you.”
The complaint and claim
2.5 The consumer demands that the Commission determines that the bank must adjust the statement about the
differences in interest rates on its website and other channels.
According to the consumer, the bank’s statement was incorrect, misleading and
non-transparent. In this way, the bank pretends that different interest rates are offered
as a result of legislation and regulations in countries of the European Union. The consumer states that the differences in interest rates are
only caused by market conditions and that the bank must adjust its statement on the website
accordingly. Even after the text has been adjusted, the consumer does not agree
with the content of the statement given by the bank and demands that the bank removes the words
rules and regulations from the text. The defence
2.6 The bank has defended itself against the consumer's claims. Where relevant, the committee will address this in its assessment.
3. The assessment
What should the committee judge?
3.1 The core of the dispute is whether the bank must adjust the text on its website as suggested by the consumer.
3.2 As the most far-reaching defence, the bank has invoked article 3:303 of the Civil Code (BW) and stated that the consumer no longer has an interest in his claim now that the bank has (i) increased the interest rate for its Irish customers to 2.46%1 and (ii) the bank has adjusted the text on its website. Before the committee can start the substantive handling of the consumer's complaint, it will first have to deal with this formal defence. If this defence is successful, the committee will not start the substantive handling of the complaint.
3.3 Following the bank's defence, the consumer has requested the committee to assess the complaint at the time he submitted it to Kifid. Legal framework 3.4 The Supreme Court has ruled that an objection, appeal or (incidental) appeal must be declared inadmissible if the person submitting the legal remedy has no interest in it. According to the Supreme Court, this is the case if the use of the legal remedy cannot put him in a better position, the consumer has no interest in his claim
3.5 The first thing to note is that the consumer did have an interest in submitting his complaint at the time the complaint was filed. However, this does not affect the fact that his interest has lapsed as a result of the interest rate increase and the adjustment of the text on the website. Since the consumer has only requested adjustment of the text on the website and he has not stated nor has it been demonstrated that he has suffered damage, the committee rules that the consumer cannot be put in a better position than is currently the case if the claim is allowed. In view of this, the committee concludes that under these circumstances the consumer no longer has an interest in a ruling on the adjustment of the text on the website.5 In view of the above, the committee will not grant the consumer's request to assess the complaint at the time he filed the complaint.
Conclusion
3.6 The conclusion is that the consumer no longer has an interest in his claim because it cannot put him in a better position. The committee will therefore not proceed to the substantive handling of the complaint.
4. The decision
The committee declares the complaint inadmissible.
This decision was established on 8 August 2024 and taken by Mr. F.H.E. Boerma as
chairman with Mr. A. Kanhai as secretary.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 53,759
Hi Podge
I didn't reread the whole thing, but am I right in saying that your complaint resulted in them stopping discriminating against Irish customers?
If so, well done indeed.
Brendan
I didn't reread the whole thing, but am I right in saying that your complaint resulted in them stopping discriminating against Irish customers?
If so, well done indeed.
Brendan
podgerodge
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,061
Well, I guess part of their defence was that they had raised the rate so I'll take a little credit