Fraud alarm - but I'd committed no crime

My NatWest cash card would not function when I tried to use it in a cash machine in London last June. Inside the bank, the manageress offered to handle it for me.

As I was leaving for Brazil the next day I did not have much choice but to leave the card with her. Since then I have written and phoned several times - to no avail.
RL, Rio de Janeiro

Nat West accepts the blame. It has a computer- generated crime check which recognises unusual patterns of cash withdrawals. Using the card abroad does not trigger an alarm but taking out frequent large amounts does, even though this is normal behaviour when visiting family.

The computer had already alerted the system when you tried to make the last withdrawal. By then you should have been contacted by NatWest staff to check that your card had not been stolen. As they had not, the computer blocked your transaction.

NatWest has no record of your subsequent phone calls and cannot explain why your problem was ignored. It has now sent you a new card and £200, which is £50 for international phone calls and £150 compensation.

Corporate inhospitality

When I tried to use my American Express corporate card to pay for corporate hospitality last February, the restaurant said it had been cancelled. Amex blamed 'payment irregularities' and withdrew my 80,000 reward points.

Some direct debits had been rejected due to Amex's maladministration. I have tried contacting them but was told it was corporate policy not to reply to customer letters once an account has been cancelled.
RC, London

American Express has now sent you grudging apology, still blaming you and your bank rather than taking responsibility for even some of the mistakes with your direct debit. It has done only the minimum it should and reinstated your card and reward points.

Left in the lurch in divorce case

When my daughter divorced, the court said she should pay her ex-husband £3,000 and transfer to him her interest in a joint Legal & General life insurance policy. He had to give her his interest in the house, mortgaged with Bristol & West, and his interest in a joint Friends Provident policy.

She has complied but he has not. As my daughter is not in a fit state to deal with this, I contacted Friends Provident. They have no record of the deed of transfer and say that, unless we produce it, on maturity all proceeds will go to the mortgage lender, which will send any money left over to the person named on the policy, which is still my daughter's ex-husband.

Her solicitor at the time of the divorce proceedings left the firm shortly after, apparently taking the files with him. He has since moved firms twice more.
AP, Dorchester

On looking at this in more detail, Friends Provident has been able to uncross some wires. It knew that the deed of assignment had been executed but its records do not show who told them that.

Friends Provident's letter was wrong to say it will not pay your daughter the proceeds unless she produces the deed, which is probably still with one of the firms your daughter's solicitor worked for. Friends Provident will accept the court order as evidence that the policy is entirely hers.

It admits it should not have speculated on what the lender would do with the proceeds, because that depends on the terms of the mortgage agreement. Bristol & West confirms this is solely in your daughter's name now, and all the money left after repaying the loan will go to her.

It's an Equitable Life after all

I have two substantial GAR (guaranteed annuity rate) policies with Equitable Life. As I am retired and need to draw on at least one of them, my IFA requested quotations for both on 21 June.

One arrived dated 10 July and we were still waiting for the other when the 16 per cent reduction in policy values was announced on 16 July. I have still not received a quote for the other policy.

My adviser received verbal confirmation from both head office and the Leeds office that the quotation we had received would be honoured if we claimed within the 14-day cooling-off period. We did but were then told that 16 per cent would be deducted after all.

I am not making a fuss about not receiving a quote on the second policy but I am upset that I should suffer the 16 per cent fall when the delay was caused by waiting for the second quote.
PK, Ilkley

As information from Equitable Life started dribbling through, you discovered that you had a rare flexible guaranteed annuity rate policy that allowed a spouse's annuity. You decided to drop the complaint about losing 16 per cent and concentrate on claiming the flexible GAR. At that point, Equitable Life agreed to honour the quotation and you now have the 16 per cent reinstated.

RBS in my black books

I cut up my Royal Bank of Scotland Advanta credit card because of a dispute over charges: they received my payment on time but still applied interest. It took a year before they showed my closing balance as zero.

I specifically asked them in writing to make sure there were no negative comments on my credit record but a mortgage application earlier this month was rejected.
GD, Faringdon

Royal Bank of Scotland denies agreeing that the charges were wrongly imposed, saying it refunded the money as a gesture of goodwill. During the dispute, it had informed the credit reference agencies, Equifax and Experian, that you were in arrears because, after you stopped using the card, you did not pay the monthly minimum the bank claimed was due.

RBS updated the agencies at the end of the dispute but told them only that the debt had been satisfied. Your payment history, which shows that you had failed to make payments, can stay on your file for six years. RBS has now asked the credit reference agencies to remove the default history as well.

· Email Margaret Dibben at money.writes@observer.co.uk or write to Margaret Dibben, Money Writes, The Observer, 119 Farringdon Road, London EC1R 3ER and include a telephone number. Do not enclose SAEs or original documents. Letters are selected for publication and we cannot give personal replies. The newspaper accepts no legal responsibility for advice.