BAD SERVICE

I have been a client of FNB for years and have a cheque account and bond with them. As a loyal and good client I had a personal banker who I could deal with in terms of all my banking needs. During November 2024 I was put under debt review *******ly. The bank authorised a deduction by the debt counsellor. My whole world came to a standstill as I was not able to meet my financial obligations. This after having a flawless credit record ever since I started working in 1991. FNB never even bothered to contact me to establish whether I have app**** to be placed under debt review. There was only one payment to the debt counsellor. During 2026, after extensively investigating the debt review I requested FNB to provide me with a copy of the document which they acted upon. An email with 4 documents attached was forwarded to me. Documents were named 17.1 form and 17.2 DC determination. When I opened the documents all were the same page save under different names. My signature was nowhere to be found. The bank has the right to request the form(form 16) signed by their client to verify that the client consented to the debt review process. FNB was not able to produce a copy of the form and I am of the opinion that they might have never requested and recieved the signed form. They therefore went ahead with a process without protecting a loyal client with a 100% record in the process. In terms of the National Credit Act (NCA), all parties must negotiate in "good faith." If a bank suspects a consumer was placed under review without their knowledge, they may demand the signed application before halting legal action or debit orders. If the debt review matter goes to court, the bank (as a respondent) is entitled to see all supporting documents, including signed declarations and the debt counsellor’s assessment, to prepare their response or objection. I visited a FNB branch to raise these concerns but without success. Was informed by a manager that the bank only acts on what they recieved. He suggested that I report the matter to the Ombudsman. The bank has once again had no interest in protecting a loyal client.