Hellopeter
Share Your Experience
RS
Rudi S

1 reviews | Active since May 2017

07 May 2020, 14:13

Refuses to pay claim, now admits to their records being wrong for 2 years.

The Fundisa Fund is a government initiative in collaboration with FSPs like Nedbank, to assist with education fees for students. It consists of the investor’s portion and a government allocated portion. My daughter completed her studies at UCT and needed to attend a course at a recognized institution to get annual credits to allow her to continue practicing as an Occupational The******. I went to the Nedbank branch in the Somerset West Mall, Western Cape, to find out whether the Fundisa Fund would pay for the course. The staff at the branch was unable to assist and I was shown to a phone and told to phone the call center. When the call center eventually answered I was told I would be transferred to someone who knows more about the Fundisa Fund. I explained to the next person I needed confirmation that the institute giving the training, qualifies for payment. She seemed to be going through her system checking for confirmation, and then told me the easiest would be to pay and then claim it back, which I then did. Nedbank then refused to pay my claim, stating that I was not entitled to the money. Nedbank further responded to my complaint wanting to know who I spoke with. I expected to be assisted by someone at the branch; I was not expecting to speak to numerous people, so I did not go prepared to keep record of my interactions with all Nedbank staff. I had regularly received updated value statements from Nedbank, which has my name on it and wherein it refers to “your Investment”, 11 times. The last one received 18 April 2020. Now Nedbank informs me that these funds should have been removed from my portfolio in May 2018, 2 years ago. This clearly indicates to incompetence and inadequate systems and controls. In my mind I now strongly have to questions Nedbank’s ability to effectively manage any of their products and their ability to safely handle my money. I still expect Nedbank to honour my claim. It is not my fault that I was given incorrect information by one of their staff, which was likely based on their incompetence in not removing the money from my portfolio for 2 years.

0
Replies (1)
RS
Rudi S's update09 May 2020, 14:26
Reviewer Update
In follow up to my previous review of Nedbank and their management of the Fundisa Fund, I received a response from the Manager: Client Services. The following statements, as quoted from her email, are contradictory and offensive.
“Our records do not reflect a conversation between yourself and one of our consultants in which you are instructed to redeem funds and then claim later.”
So she is saying that Nedbank’s controls and records are infallible. There is no doubt whatsoever in her mind that their records are complete and up to date and she stands by them, i.e. here at Nedbank we do not make mistakes.
“In any event had a consultant spoken to you they would have confirmed that there was nothing we could do in terms of the grant portion as your withdrawal had already occurred in 2018.”
So she is saying that their consultants do not make mistakes; even if looking at a computer screen which has the incorrect information on it. What is perturbing is her insinuation that I did not speak to a Nedbank consultant. Is she implying that I’m lying?
“Due to an administrative oversight, we failed to remove the funds from the grant portion, hence the reason it has been reflecting on your statement.”
So now she admits that Nedbank’s records, systems and staff are in actual fact fallible. In fact they have been that way for the past 2 years.
My conclusion is that she deems her records to be up to date and correct when it is to her liking. One cannot be selective in this manner when you are conducting an investigation in order to resolve a complaint. In my opinion it places a question mark on the credibility of the investigation and the outcome.
What is required is for a senior manager at Nedbank to conduct a comprehensive, step by step documented investigation into the matter; not to only resolve this complaint, but to also establish the flaws in their systems, record keeping and staff training, and to identify other clients whose records are also incorrect due to “an administrative oversight”.