SUBJECT: I want to file a complaint against National Bank of Canada for:
· IGNORING MY LEGALLY ENTITLED REASONABLE MEDICAL ACCOMMODATIONS;
· IGNORING AND VIOLATING the Human Rights Code to which I am legally entitled as a Canadian citizen under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, EVEN though I am a visible minority;
· REFUSING to provide me a copy of my own signature, AFTER DEMANDING that I sign documents;
· Attempting to LIMIT MY LEGAL RIGHTS TO WHICH I AM ENTITLED by his EVIDENCED BULLY TACTICS TO FORCE ME TO SIGN DOCUMENTS that attempt to CURTAIL my legal rights;
· FALSELY AND INCORRECTLY ALLEGING that I "do not agree to terms & conditions stated";
· using FALSE AND CONCOCTED GROUNDS AND MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT TO CANCEL MY VALID COMPLAINT.
· GROUNDS OF DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT TO ME AND MISUSE OF IT’S VESTED AUTHORITY, AND VINDICTIVE REPRISAL TO ME, BY IT’S EVIDENCED UNJUST ACTIONS.
· I ASK TO BE MADE WHOLE AGAIN.
Dear Sir,
1) On 17August2011, National Bank of Canada Ombudsman representative Mr. Robert Calcagni has FALSELY AND INCORRECTY ALLEGED: "you do not agree to terms & conditions stated", and that "Office of Ombudsman will not be undertaking any investigation... will not be responding to any further communication in this regard".
2) Please refer to ALL of the self-explanatory sequence of emails below, in reverse chronological order, as well as the self-explanatory attachments, i.e. NBC04Aug2011Reply.pdf and NBC17Aug2011Refusal.jpg.
3) I wish to file a complaint against National Bank of Canada for:
(a) REFUSING to provide me a copy of my own signature, AFTER DEMANDING that I sign documents.
- It is my understanding that I am entitled to a copy of my own signature, and and documents that I am REQUIRED to sign, INCLUDING any referenced addendums;
(b) Attempting to LIMIT MY LEGAL RIGHTS TO WHICH I AM ENTITLED by his EVIDENCED BULLY TACTICS TO FORCE ME TO SIGN DOCUMENTS that attempt to CURTAIL my legal rights;
(c) FALSELY AND INCORRECTLY ALLEGING that I "do not agree to terms & conditions stated";
(d) using FALSE AND CONCOCTED GROUNDS AND MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT TO CANCEL MY VALID COMPLAINT;
(e) MISUSE OF VESTED AUTHORITY AND UNFAIR MEANS TO CANCEL MY VALID COMPLAINT by sending me communication to an INCORRECT address AND THEN attempt to limit me with a "turn-around" ARBITRARY LIMIT of response from me by 27August2011,
- IGNORING MY LEGALLY ENTITLED REASONABLE MEDICAL ACCOMMODATIONS, AFTER I CLEARLY INFORMED him that I am MEDICALLY UNWELL and REQUIRE A REASONABLE LENGTH OF TIME, which NEVER did exceed his "turn-around" time (even though he and his staff are medically unwell). This also constitutes IGNORING AND VIOLATING the Human Rights Code to which I am legally entitled as a Canadian citizen under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, EVEN though I am a visible minority.
As I stated in my earlier emailed communication to him (refer below):
- (i) "WANT A FURTHER 90 day TURN-AROUND TIME TO BUREAUCRATICALLY DEAL with A REFUSAL TO PROVIDE ME A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE (ON WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR OVER 4 MONTHS), NOW TRYING TO STIFLE ME WITH YOUR 30-DAY ARBITRARILY IMPOSED DEMANDED RESPONSE TIME ";
- (ii) "GIVEN THAT YOU HAVE BACK-DATED EARLIER LETTER (as EVIDENCED by the DIFFERENCE in the ACTUAL POSTMARK and the DATE ON THE LETTER), AND";
- (iii) "IGNORING REASONABLE MEDICAL ACCOMMODATIONS TO WHICH I AM LEGALLY ENTITLED AS A CANADIAN CITIZEN UNDER THE CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, EVEN THOUGH I AM A VISIBLE MINORITY”; “FALSE AND INCORRECT. NOWHERE IN THE EMAILED COMMUNICATION HAVE YOU MENTIONED THIS POINT EARLIER. YOU ARE IN ERROR FOR USING THE PHRASE- "As previously explained"."
- (iv) "Presently, I do not check my PO Box everyday. And I am medically unwell. Your 30 day limit, given ALL of the noted facts (herein and earlier), and my current disability and IGNORING OF IT, ALSO CONSTITUTES a VIOLATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CODE BY YOU"
(f) IN REFUSING TO PROVIDE ME EVEN A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE, AND THEN DODGE A SIMPLE QUESTION (as evidenced by the letter of Ms. Christine AFTER SEVERAL MONTHS) WHICH IS CONTRARY TO EVEN THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY.
As I stated in my earlier emailed communication to him (refer below):
- (i) "You have ALREADY done your so-called "analysis of your request". I HAVE MERELY POINTED OUT YOUR ILLOGICAL FALLACIES, BIAS AND PREJUDICE AND SKEWED ANALYSIS, AND NOT EVEN ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS I ASKED YOU, by your representative Ms. Christine, in her response earlier";
- (ii) "WHY do you NOW want this signed-statement FOR THE SAME COMPLAINT OF March2011, and NOT earlier?
Your earlier letter was POSTMARKED (and therefore posted much later) AND REACHED ME OVER 45 days AFTER you dated it. It is VERY LIKELY A TRICK YOU ARE PLAYING BY NOT ALLOWING ME A REASONABLE TIME-FRAME TO RESPOND";
(g) • GROUNDS OF DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT TO ME AND MISUSE OF IT’S VESTED AUTHORITY, AND VINDICTIVE REPRISAL TO ME, BY IT’S EVIDENCED UNJUST ACTIONS.
• I ASK TO BE MADE WHOLE AGAIN.
4) Please provide me a SATISFACTORY WRITTEN response in 7 calendar days. Please respond to BOTH my emails and via postal-mail. This is because of my current medical limitations (that I have referred to above) and any possible errors with email servers, which have been known to occur in the past.
***********
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275 . Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via fax AND postal-mail; AS WELL AS email to [email protected] and [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] with a "cc" to [email protected])
Dear Sir,
1) (a) This is in response to your postal-mailed letter to me, signed by your Deputy Ombudsman Robert Calcagni. It was postmarked and dated 08August2011, that I have received today.
(b) Also, please refer to ALL of my relevant communications to you, INCLUDING the fax and postal-mailed signed-form and communication that I have sent to you today, and the attachment to this email.
(c) This email also serves as a CONFIRMATION of the fax and postal-mail signed-form and communication that I have sent to you now.
(d) Please NOTE that my earlier signed document stands UNCHANGED. Also, refer to electronic attachment NBC04Aug2011Reply.pdf. In particular, also please note what I have hand-written on the fax and postal-mailed communication sent to you today. Once again, it is noted below.
(e) I have clearly stated: "Be advised that I do NOT agree to ANY limitations that you may set which attempt to limit my legal rights to which I am entitled. Also refer to ALL of my prior communications to your bank, in it's entirety".
(f) Therefore, YOU ARE CLEARLY FALSIFYING fact by ALLEGING: “that you stated on this document that you are not in agreement with its outlined terms & conditions”.
(g) Please Do NOT FALSIFY fact by MISREPRESENTING what I have stated clearly. You CANNOT AND MAY NOT LIMIT MY LEGAL RIGHTS TO WHICH I AM ENTITLED by your EVIDENCED BULLY TACTICS TO FORCE ME TO SIGN DOCUMENTS that attempt to CURTAIL my legal rights.
(h) Therefore, You are CLEARLY using FALSE AND CONCOCTED GROUNDS AND MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT TO CANCEL MY COMPLAINT. You CANNOT AND MAY NOT LIMIT MY LEGAL RIGHTS TO WHICH I AM ENTITLED by your EVIDENCED BULLY TACTICS TO FORCE ME TO SIGN DOCUMENTS that attempt to CURTAIL my legal rights.
3) Please provide me a SATISFACTORY WRITTEN response in 7 calendar days.
**********
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275. Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via fax AND postal-mail; AS WELL AS email to [email protected] and [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] with a "cc" to [email protected])
Dear Sir,
1) (a) This is in response to your postal-mailed letter to me, signed by your techncial advisor Ms. Judith Germain. It was postmarked and dated 27July2011, that I have received today.
(b) Also, please refer to ALL of my relevant communications to you, INCLUDING the fax and postal-mailed signed-form and communication that I have sent to you today.
(c) This email also serves as a CONFIRMATION of the fax and postal-mail signed-form and communication that I have sent to you today.
(d) Also, refer to electronic attachment NBC04Aug2011Reply.pdf.
2) In particular, also please note what I have hand-written on the fax and postal-mailed communication sent to you today. Once again, it is noted below.
(a) "Be advised that I do NOT agree to ANY limitations that you may set which attempt to limit my legal rights to which I am entitled. Also refer to ALL of my prior communciations to your bank, in it's entirety".
(b) WHY have you INCORRECTLY noted my P.O. Box, AND then attempt to limit me with a "turn-around" ARBITRARY LIMIT of response by 27August2011, IGNORING MY LEGALLY ENTITLED REASONABLE MEDICAL ACCOMMODATIONS?
Is this ANOTHER of your cheap and sneaky tricks" to cancel my complaint? BECAUSE IF IT NEVER REACHES ME (with your INCORRECT addressing), THEN you "claim" that you sent it and I did not respond; When IN ACTUALITY, IT NEVER REACHES ME? Please REFER to the attached proof in the scanned attachment (as well as fax and postal-mail sent to you) today, by me.
3) Please provide me a SATISFACTORY WRITTEN response in 7 calendar days.
********
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275. Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via email to [email protected] and [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] with a "cc" to [email protected])
Dear Sir,
This is further to my earlier email of today.
Your UNNAMED representative mentioned: "explaining the mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman for clients".
My response:
(1) It is ALREADY PUBLICLY AVAILABLE at:
(a) https://www.nbc.ca/bnc/cda/productfamily/0, 2664, divId-2_langId-1_navCode-15758, 00.html
and (b) https://www.obsi.ca/UI/ComplaintProcess/Step1.aspx
WHY does that NECESSITATE A SIGNATURE FROM ME NOW WHEN I HAVE EXPOSED YOUR EVIDENCED DOUBLE STANDARDS AND HYPOCRISY?
(2) So there is NO REQUIREMENT for me to SIGN ANYTHING ESPECIALLY SINCE YOUR STAFF HAS BEEN KNOWN TO EVIDENCE A BULLY AND ARROGANT ATTITUDE, IN REFUSING TO PROVIDE ME EVEN A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE, AND THEN DODGE A SIMPLE QUESTION (as evidenced by the letter of Ms. Christine AFTER SEVERAL MONTHS) WHICH IS CONTRARY TO EVEN THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY.
Please refer to ALL my provided communications that SUBSTANTIATE this LOGICAL CONCLUSION.
(3) If you want people to communicate with you in TODAYS ELECTRONIC AGE via your "secure webmailbox" THEN REMOVE your "Message (maximum 3000 characters)" from https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=Ombudsman&action=69&lang=en.
(a) Apparently, compared to your competitors, you are moving BEHIND the times. The other Canadian banks appear to be more logical, more available, more customer service oriented IN TERMS OF THEIR DEMONSTRATED ACTIONS and electronically available.
(b) You WANT A FURTHER 90 day TURN-AROUND TIME TO BUREAUCRATICALLY DEAL with A REFUSAL TO PROVIDE ME A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE (ON WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR OVER 4 MONTHS),
AND
(c) NOW TRYING TO STIFLE ME WITH YOUR 30-DAY ARBITRARILY IMPOSED DEMANDED RESPONSE TIME,
(d) GIVEN THAT YOU HAVE BACK-DATED EARLIER LETTER (as EVIDENCED by the DIFFERENCE in the ACTUAL POSTMARK and the DATE ON THE LETTER), AND
(e) IGNORING REASONABLE MEDICAL ACCOMMODATIONS TO WHICH I AM LEGALLY ENTITLED AS A CANADIAN CITIZEN UNDER THE CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, EVEN THOUGH I AM A VISIBLE MINORITY.
(4) Please provide me a SATISFACTORY WRITTEN response in 7 calendar days.
******
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275. Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via email to [email protected] [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] with a "cc" to [email protected])
Dear Sir,
Your UNNAMED representative mentioned: "has undertaken the analysis of your request. As previously explained, a letter dated July 27, 2011 was mailed to you outlining the Ombudsman process. If you wish to prevail yourself of this process, the Office of the Ombudsman will require said letter returned duly signed."
My response:
1) Did you EVEN READ CAREFULLY ALL of the email chain sequence ENTIRELY, BEFORE RESPONDING? Or are you doing SELECTIVE READING AND IGNORING WHAT DOES NOT SUIT YOU?
2) Your statement - "as previously explained, a letter dated July 27..." is FALSE AND INCORRECT. NOWHERE IN THE EMAILED COMMUNICATION HAVE YOU MENTIONED THIS POINT EARLIER. YOU ARE IN ERROR FOR USING THE PHRASE- "As previously explained".
3) You have ALREADY done your so-called "analysis of your request". I HAVE MERELY POINTED OUT YOUR ILLOGICAL FALLACIES, BIAS AND PREJUDICE AND SKEWED ANALYSIS, AND NOT EVEN ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS I ASKED YOU, by your representative Ms. Christine, in her response earlier.
4) WHY do you NOW want this signed-statement FOR THE SAME COMPLAINT OF March2011, and NOT earlier?
5) WHY NOW?
6) Your earlier letter was POSTMARKED (and therefore posted much later) AND REACHED ME OVER 45 days AFTER you dated it. It is VERY LIKELY A TRICK YOU ARE PLAYING BY NOT ALLOWING ME A REASONABLE TIME-FRAME TO RESPOND.
7) Presently, I do not check my PO Box everyday. And I am medically unwell. Your 30 day limit, given ALL of the noted facts (herein and earlier), and my current disability and IGNORING OF IT, ALSO CONSTITUTES a VIOLATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CODE BY YOU.
Also, please refer to https://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/discrimination/physical_mental-eng.aspx.
8) So, your 30 day limit is NOT ACCEPTABLE AND UNREASONABLE, ESPECIALLY SINCE YOU CLAIM 90 DAY turn-around time from others, and THEN EXPECT THEM TO REVERT BACK IN 30 DAYS.
9) WHY DONT YOU DO TO OTHERS AS YOU WANT THEM TO UNTO YOU?
******
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275. Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via email to [email protected] and [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] with a "cc" to [email protected])
Dear Sir,
1) This is in response to the email from [email protected] NOT SIGNED NOR WRITTEN BY ANYONE WITH NO SPECIFIC NAME OF THE WRITER, Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 4:28 PM. It is enclosed immediately below. It is concerning my, AS YET, UNRESOLVED COMPLAINT BY YOU that you have been LINGERING ONTO SINCE MARCH2011.
2) Your UNNAMED representative mentioned: "The Bank is highly concerned with the quality of the service offered to each and every customer and therefore greatly appreciates your comments".
My response:
(a) Please refer to my email sent to you on 21July2011. As I mentioned therein: "The proof of the pudding is in the eating".
(b) The fact that you have NOT satisfactorily even dealt with such a simple matter, EVIDENCES that you TALK BIG BUT ACT SMALL in matters of quality of service offered. EVIDENTLY YOU PRACTICE A VERY POR CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARD.
3) Your UNNAMED representative mentioned: "You will be receiving a formal acknowledgement of receipt by mail in the following week, explaining the mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman for clients. If you agree with its process, we ask that you sign and return the aforementioned letter so your request can be reviewed".
My response:
(a) I will SIGN NOTHING. I am NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO GET HEMMED IN TO SIGNING ANYTHING concering this complaint, which you have been sitting on since March2011. Please read the ENTIRE EMAIL CHAIN SEQUENCE (enclosed below) SINCE MARCH 2011.
(b) Canadian banking procedures do NOT REQUIRE me to SIGN ANY FURTHER DOCUMENTS WITH YOU concerning this matter, AND, THEREFORE, I REFUSE TO SIGN ANYTHING FURTHER.
(c) WHY DO YOU WANT SOMETHING SIGNED NOW, AND NOT EARLIER (since March2011)?
(d) I AM RAISING MY COMPLAINT WITH YOU, THE OMBUDSMAN OF THIS BANK AND I ASK FOR A SATISFACTORY WRITTEN RESOLUTION IN 7 CALENDAR DAYS.
(e) IT IS A REASONABLE TIME-FRAME, SINCE YOU HAVE BEEN SITTING ON THIS COMPLAINT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS ALREADY SINCE MARCH 2011, WHICH IS OVER 4 MONTHS.
(f) I have NOT raised any new points. I have simply pointed out the FALSE AND INCORRECT STATEMENTS MADE by your representative who has NOT provided me a satisfactory written resolution. Neither has she answered the question I have asked.
(g) It is NOT a new complaint. And therefore, there is NO REQUIREMENT to start with another 90 days wait period. Read my complaint of earlier. And provide me the answer I have asked in it.
4) Your UNNAMED representative mentioned: "Also, as e-mail is not a secure means of communication, we advise you not to use it to send your personal or banking information. Only general information should be sent by e-mail".
My response:
(a) NO specific banking information has been exchanged such as my account numbers or dollar amounts etc.
(b) Given that YOUR MULTIPLE staff have corresponded with me via email you have provided your email to the public at large on your website and business cards of your employees, and YOU EMAILED ME EARLIER, there is NO LOGICAL reason for you, to NOW state that email is not applicable here.
(c) Furthermore, this is general information, SINCE NO dollar amounts and NO specific account numbers are being referenced.
(d) SO YOUR RATIONALE IS ILLOGICAL, IRRATIONAL, AND NOT ACCEPTABLE to me.
(e) THEREFORE, I SHALL BE COMMUNICATING VIA EMAIL concerning this complaint, as is the acceptable norm with other banks for such matters.
(f) Evidently, you are simply picking on a LAME EXCUSE since it ALLOWS ME TO ATTACH THE ENTIRE SEQUENCE CHAIN OF EMAILS AND EXPOSE YOUR DOUBLE STANDARDS AND EVIDENCED HYPOCRISY.
5) Your UNNAMED representative mentioned: "Please be advised that the Ombudsman office process takes an average 90 days but rest assure that everything will be done to expedite your request".
My response:
(a) I have answered this point above. Please refer to it and read it carefully.
(b) Once again- I have NOT raised any new points. I have simply pointed out the FALSE PREMISES, SKEWED FACTS, AND INCORRECT STATEMENTS MADE by your investigator representative Ms. Christine, who has NOT provided me a satisfactory written resolution. Neither has she answered the question I have asked AT ALL. Please refer to ALL of my earlier relevant communciations enclosed below.
(c) It is NOT a new complaint. And therefore, there is NO REQUIREMENT to start with another 90 days wait period.
(d) Please Read CAREFULLY my complaint of earlier. YOU ARE MAKING A MOUNTAIN OF A MOLEHILL AND HAVE BEEN DODGING FACTS AND ACCEPTING YOUR MISTAKE INSTEAD OF RIGHTFULLY ACCEPTING YOUR ERROR AND MAKING ME WHOLE AGAIN FOR THE DAMAGES THAT I HAVE SUFFERED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF YOUR UNJUST AND INCORRECT ACTIONS.
(e) And provide me the answers I have asked in my earlier communications.
(f) I ASK FOR A SATISFACTORY WRITTEN RESOLUTION IN 7 CALENDAR DAYS. IT IS A REASONABLE TIME-FRAME, SINCE YOU HAVE BEEN SITTING ON THIS COMPLAINT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS ALREADY SINCE MARCH 2011, WHICH IS OVER 4 MONTHS.
6) Please provide me a satisfactory WRITTEN response within 7 calendar days.
***********
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275. Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via email to [email protected] and [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
Dear Sir,
1) This is in response to the postal-mailed letter from Ms. Christine Lavallee, dated 01June2011 (POSTMARKED 03June2011) that I have received a few days ago.
2) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "National Bank strives to offer quality service to all its clients"
My response: The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
3) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "you then gave a few bills back to Customer Service Representative, Ms. Cheung... you recounted yourself".
My response:
(a) I had CLEARLY spoken with Mr. Li via phone PRIOR to making the appointment that I came in-person for, that I required $20 bills that were not ripped nor torn since I use automated machines often, and some $5 bills that were not ripped nor torn.
(b) Ms. Cheung was acting under instruction from Mr. Li. I CLEARLY mentioned that I will count the money MYSELF BEFORE I sign for it, TO WHICH I AM LEGALLY ENTITLED.
(c) You are SIDE-TRACKING the issue here. This does NOT address the issue AT ALL.
(d) Please refer to my earlier email of 21March2011 enclosed below. I CLEARLY mentioned to Mr. Li: " You forgot to give me the changed $5 bill (in return for the tattered $5 bill) when you returned to the branch-office-room with your and Mr. Yau s business-cards. "
(e) There was NO issue with Ms. Cheung. Mr. Li was standing there supervising Ms. Cheung. I was NOT even provided her name.
4) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "this type of request is unusual. Ms. Cheung claims she honoured it".
My response:
(a) The request may be unusual, BUT IT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE AND I AM LEGALLY ENTITLED TO IT.
(b) Ms. Cheung did NOT honor it initially. It is only when I mentioned it to Mr. Li (and I have had a prior discussion on the phone with Mr. Li on this point). It is only AFTER Mr. Li told her to give me a copy of it, that Ms. Cheung provided it to me.
(c) WHY are you involving this Ms. Cheung in it anyway? She was just a customer service representative and employe ACTING UNDER INSTRUCTION of her supervisor, the customer service manager Mr. Li. I made an appointment to deal with Mr. Li, and was dealing with him all along.
(d) WHAT DO YOU EXPECT YOUR employees to say in this situation anyway? Do you expect them to say anything that will jeopardize their job? Do you expect them to put their job on the line in this recession economy, and say that they did anything incorrectly? WHAT KIND OF A BIASED INVESTIGATION IS THIS, WHERE YOU ARE RELYING ON VERBAL HEARSAY OF THE OTHER PARTY WHO IS YOUR PAID EMPLOYEE AND USING HER HEARSAY TO CONCLUDE AN INVESTIGATION?
5) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "Finally you were given Mr. Li's and Mr. Yau's business cards as requested".
My response:
(a) You are SIDE-TRACKING the issue here. This does NOT address the issue AT ALL.
(b) Please refer to my earlier email of 21March2011 enclosed below. I CLEARLY mentioned to Mr. Li: " You forgot to give me the changed $5 bill (in return for the tattered $5 bill) when you returned to the branch-office-room with your and Mr. Yau s business-cards. "
6) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "your intention to demand that for future withdrawal transactions, you receive the amount requested before you sign the withdrawal slip."
My response:
(a) This is A FALSE AND INACCURATE ALLEGATION.
(b) Please refer to my emails (enclosed below in the sequence chain of emails) of 21March2011 and 26March2011.
(c) As I mentioned therein: "THEREFORE, moving forward, as I mentioned earlier (in my email to you of 21March2011):
- (i) In light of the incident occurrence detailed below, for the future, I want to exercise my legally permissible right to sign acknowledgement of my cash-withdrawal AFTER I MYSELF count and receive the cash, which also makes logical sense since an acknowledgement should be demanded AFTER and NOT BEFORE the ACTUAL transaction.
- (ii) This time (as in the past MULTIPLE times), it was DEMANDED by your branch representatives, that I sign the acknowledgement BEFORE I ACTUALLY RECEIVED AND COUNTED the cash.
- (iii) Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to receive them. "
(d) I am STILL WITHIN THE BANKING PREMISES MONITORED BY YOUR SECURITY CAMERAS AND IN FRONT OF YOUR STAFF. DO YOU EXPECT ME TO RUN AWAY WITH THE MONEY?
(e) WITH THE UNEQUAL BALANCE OF POWER AND THE EVIDENCED BULLY ATTITUDE OF YOUR BANK AND STAFF, YOU ARE GETTING ME TO SIGN AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DOCUMENT THAT I HAVE ACTUALLY RECEIVED THE MONEY BEFORE I EVEN COUNT IT? THIS IS UNUSUAL. YOU ARE NOT THE FIRST BANK THAT I AM DEALING WITH. NO OTHER BANK THAT I HAVE ENCOUNTERED SO FAR, DEMANDS THAT A CUSTOMER SIGN AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECEIVING CASH BEFORE ACTUALLY GIVING IT TO HIM.
7) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "Mr. Yau replied that he could not respond favourably to your request, as it was a violation of Bank procedure".
My response:
(a) You are EVIDENTLY trying to PROTECT YOUR OWN EMPLOYEE. This is a FALSE AND CONCOCTED "INVESTIGATION" with a BIASED AND PREJUDICED AND PRE_CONCEIVED CONCLUSION.
(b) You are SIDE-TRACKING THE ISSUE and NOT ANSWERING THE DIRECT POINT.
(c) Please refer to ALL my earlier emailed communication.
(d) On 21March2011, I mentioned: "Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to receive them".
(e) On 30March2011, Mr. Yau mentoned: " your suggestion to provide us with your signature after you have received the money on withdrawal of funds from your account is not in compliance with our procedures and therefore is not acceptable".
ESSENTIALLY Mr. Yau REFUSED TO GIVE ME A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE.
(f) On 19April2011, I mentioned: "I am concerned about Mr. Yau stating to me (via email on 30March2011, enclosed below): “…. To provide…. YOUR signature …. Is NOT in compliance with OUR procedures and therefore is NOT acceptable. This is NOT consistent with CANADIAN BANKING PRACTICES ….. share with me your experience�.
- IF this is NOT consistent with CANADIAN BANKING PRACTICES then WHY am I able to get a copy of my OWN signature from OTHER CANADIAN banks and even NBC earlier? Now, after I have asked Mr. Yau, he is ARBITRARILY AND DESPOTICALLY refusing me a copy of what is being DEMANDED of me to sign. I have YET to see a bank INTERNATIONALLY that DEMANDS customers to sign documents and THEN REFUSES to give them a copy of what the customer was asked to sign! Most certainly, it does NOT even seem ethical, NOR does it respect Freedom-of-Information (to the customer himself), NOR does it seem consistent with existing CONSUMER laws and Privacy laws.
- To FORCE someone to SIGN documents AND THEN REFUSE him a COPY of his OWN SIGNATURE is a BULLY TACTIC, AND CONTRARY to the PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES.
•Is YOUR employee and representative, Mr. Yau telling me that you are the ONLY bank in Canada that REFUSES customers a copy of what NBC DEMANDS them to sign, to GET the customer’s OWN MONEY?
(g) IF IT A VIOLATION OF YOUR BANK PROCEDURE, THEN WHY -
- (i) WAS I GIVEN THAT BY MR. Li IN MY LAST VISIT TO THE BANK AND PRIOR VISITS TO THE BANK?
- (ii) WHY HAVE YOU SENT IT TO ME NOW?
- (iii) IS YOUR BANK NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATIONS GOVERNING OTHER CANADIAN BANKS?
- (iv) WHY HAVE I BEEN ABLE TO GET IT FROM OTHER BANKS?
8) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "two copies of the requested document were given to you when the transaction was carried out on March21"
My response:
(a) That is an EFFECTIVELY FALSE AND INACCURATE STATEMENT.
(b) Giving me a FADED AND UNREADABLY FAINT COPY WHERE THE PRINT IS NOT EVEN READABLE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN ACCEPTABLE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT.
(c) EFFECTIVELY I WAS ONLY GIVEN ONE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT, AND THAT UNWILLINGLY AFTER MUCH HARASSMENT TO ME AND AFTER HAVING TO ASK FOR IT MULTIPLE TIMES. WHY ARE YOU HARASSING ME FOR GETTING A COPY OF WHAT I AM LEGALLY ENTITLED TO? WHY DID MS. CHEUNG REFUSE TO GIVE IT TO ME INITIALLY, EVEN AFTER I HAD DISCUSSED THE MATTER ON MULTIPLE OCCASSIONS WITH Mr. Li and the other representative Mr. Amjad Mahmood?
9) Ms. Lavallee mentioned: "without your signature on the withdrawal slip, the Bank, cannot respond favourably to any withdrawal requests".
My response:
(a) You are SIDE-TRACKING THE POINT here.
(b) I have NOT asked any of your representatives for a copy of the withdrawal slip without my signature on it.
(c) WHEN did I ask any of your representatives for a copy of the withdrawal slip without my signature on it?
(d) WHAT good will it do for me to get a copy of the withdrawal slip WITHOUT my signature on it?
(e) Have you EVEN READ CAREFULLY the emails and written communication that I have sent? Or are you just doing SELECTIVE READING TO attempt to justify the INAPPROPRIATE ACTIONS OF YOUR EMPLOYEES?
(f) Your customer service representive Ms. Cheung and your branch manager Mr. Yau REFUSED TO GIVE ME A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE, WHICH PROMPTED ME TO VOICE A COMPLAINT.
(g) READ CAREFULLY ALL MY COMMUNICATIONS (enclosed below) BEFORE YOU MAKE SUCH AN IRRESPONSIBLE ALLEGATION AND STATMENT CONCERNING ME.
10) MOVING FORWARD, I WANT A CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS ANSWER to my earlier asked question, to which you have EFFECTIVELY NOW RESPONDED WITH A BIASED AND CONCOCTED SO-CALLED ONE-SIDED "INVESTIGATION" AND THEN ATTEMPTING TO PROTECT YOUR EMPLOYEE Mr. Yau WHO IS IN ERROR IN REFUSING ME A COPY OF MY OWN SIGNATURE.
As I asked in March2011, once again:
"
- Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to receive them.
- You may be entitled to your records. And when we are dealing with matters OF MY MONEY, I [or any other customer] is entitled to my [his] legally valid records.
- My request is consistent with the governing legislations’, including the Bank Act, existing consumer protection and privacy laws that protect the public.
I (or any other customer) cannot be FORCED (and bullied) to sign documents and THEN REFUSED a copy of what you DEMAND me to sign.
11) Please provide me a satisfactory WRITTEN response within 7 calendar days.
**********
To
Ombudsman
National Bank of Canada (herein referred to as NBC)
Office of the National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients
P.O. Box 275. Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3G7
(Delivered via email to [email protected] and [email protected] and your LIMITED-CHARACTER web-mail-box on your website)
Dear Sir,
1) I spoke to your representative Mr. Philip Dube at approximately 1209pm on 06April2011. He asked me then to forward the email (enclosed below, from Mr. Yau) to him at [email protected]. It is enclosed below in the reverse-chronologically ordered sequence of emails.
2) I spoke to Mr. Philip Dube at approximately 4:40pm on 19April2011. He NOW asked me to forward the email (enclosed below, from Mr. Yau) to him at [email protected].
3) Mr. Dube also mentioned on 19April2011 that, based on my earlier communication, I should have the answer from Mediation Department within a couple of days. Therefore, I am addressing this email to the Ombudsman.
4) Like any other customer, I am interested in a speedy resolution AND THE NET RESULT, INSTEAD OF getting bogged-down with your INTERNAL BUREAUCRATIC procedures, which do NOTHING for me EXCEPT waste my time and effort.
5) I am concerned about Mr. Dube informing me that it can take up to 90 calendar days to get an answer from NBC Ombudsman. It makes me wonder: (a) do YOU HAVE SO MANY DISSATISFIED customers, and- or (b) are you just plain DISORGANIZED AND SLOW, and-or (c) do you need to hire more staff? It also partially addressed Mr. Yau’s asking me: “share with me (which I am doing by cc-copy to him) your experience for us to improve upon�.
6) Waiting 90 days to get an answer on WHY the branch manager, Mr. Yau is REFUSING me a copy of my OWN signature seems absurd!
7) I am concerned about Mr. Yau stating to me (via email on 30March2011, enclosed below): “…. To provide…. YOUR signature …. Is NOT in compliance with OUR procedures and therefore is NOT acceptable. This is NOT consistent with CANADIAN BANKING PRACTICES ….. share with me your experience�.
8) IF this is NOT consistent with CANADIAN BANKING PRACTICES then WHY am I able to get a copy of my OWN signature from OTHER CANADIAN banks and even NBC earlier? Now, after I have asked Mr. Yau, he is ARBITRARILY AND DESPOTICALLY refusing me a copy of what is being DEMANDED of me to sign. I have YET to see a bank INTERNATIONALLY that DEMANDS customers to sign documents and THEN REFUSES to give them a copy of what the customer was asked to sign! Most certainly, it does NOT even seem ethical, NOR does it respect Freedom-of-Information (to the customer himself), NOR does it seem consistent with existing CONSUMER laws and Privacy laws.
9) To FORCE someone to SIGN documents AND THEN REFUSE him a COPY of his OWN SIGNATURE is a BULLY TACTIC, AND CONTRARY to the PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES.
•Is YOUR employee and representative, Mr. Yau telling me that you are the ONLY bank in Canada that REFUSES customers a copy of what NBC DEMANDS them to sign, to GET the customer’s OWN MONEY?
10) Now, Mr. Yau wants me to “share with him my experience for us to improve upon� (please refer to his email to me, enclosed below).
My response:
(a) While I have attempted to do so to some extent by virtue of this email (on which I am “cc�ing Mr. Yau), the bottom line is: Improving YOUR operations is YOUR problem. It is NOT my concern. I am NOT an unpaid, volunteer, guinea-pig who is legally required to WASTE his time in TRYING TO IMPROVE your levels of customer satisfaction.
(b) And given the fact, that whenever I have stopped by in the branch, Mr. Yau is NOT even available to talk to, WHAT is in it for me to SPEND MY TIME TRYING TO IMPROVE your levels of service?
(c) Absolutely NOTHING, given the fact that NBC does NOT have a monopoly and is NOT the only bank in Toronto.
11) Now Mr. Yau mentioned: “you had counted and verified the amount received was correct�.
My response:
(a) In making that statement, Mr. Yau is simply EVIDENCING that he has NOT even read my email BEFORE responding to it. He has IGNORED the ACTUAL chain and sequence of events, that I detailed to Mr. Li (who CHOSE TO IGNORE my email and did NOT even respond to it, and THEREFORE, I was FORCED to contact the branch manager, Mr. Yau).
(b) And this is YOUR CUSTOMER� SERVICE manager, Mr. Li?
(c) So WHAT does that tell you about the LEVEL of CUSTOMER service to a client (i.e. me), who locks up MINIMALLY $5000 EACH MONTH, in a chequing account that pays virtually NO interest with you in YOUR PREMIUM “Virtuoso� account (so that YOU can turn� around AND USE MY money to lend to ANOTHER CLIENT at a MUCH HIGHER INTEREST)?
(d) I wonder what happens with the customer who has a BASIC chequing account (where the client locks-up LESSER money EACH MONTH) with you!
(e) Now, $5 is NOT going to kill me. But it DOES tell me a LOT about your level of EVIDENCED honesty. And given that the best advertisement ANY business (or bank, for that matter) carries is BY WORD OF MOUTH (irrespective of how much you spend on COSTLY advertising), WHAT do YOU think I have to tell people I KNOW about NBC? WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF YOU WERE IN MY SHOES?
(f) Does the above mentioned comments ANSWER Mr. Yau’s asking me “share with me your experience for us to improve upon�?
(g) WHY should I want to SPEND MY TIME making an appointment with a branch manager who is NOT even available for me (whenever I have gone to the branch), and that too BEFORE 4pm on a weekday, to verbally discuss, WHEN the same branch manager (and his customer service manager) CHOOSE TO IGNORE my WRITTEN CONCERNS, UNTIL I escalate the concern via a “cc� to the Bank President?
12) Moving forward, please provide me a SATISFACTORY WRITTEN RESPONSE (via email and postal-mail to my, Toronto address) to my concerns that I have ALREADY put in writing earlier. You may easily refer to the SELF-EXPLANATORY sequence-chain of emails below (INSTEAD of me having to REPEAT the same issue that I have TWICE also discussed with Mr. Dube verbally, on 06April2011 and 19April2011).
· And I have made it clear in this email, that I am NOT satisfied with Mr. Yau’s response.
13) Please provide me a WRITTEN response AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, and NO later than 90 calendar days from 06April2011 (the date that I discussed the matter with your NBC Ombudsman representative Mr. Dube at 1209pm).
************
To
Mr. Peter Yau, Branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager
National Bank of Canada
4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104
Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via reply-email to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager
[email protected], with a
cc-copy to (1) Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments (OBSI)
via [email protected],
(2) Mr. Louis Vachon, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Bank,
President office via email to [email protected] and webmail-box at https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=President&action=69&lang=en)
(3) [email protected])
(4) National Bank Financial Group Ombudsman for clients via https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=Ombudsman&action=69&lang=en
(5) [email protected]
Dear Sir,
(1) Further to my earlier communication to you of today, also please refer to your professed:
(a) 5.2 sub-section Compliance with the Law, and
(b) 5.1 sub-section Respect for Clients.
publicly posted at: https://www.nbc.ca/bnc/files/bncpdf/en/2/voluntary_codes.pdf-
************
To
Mr. Peter Yau, Branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager
National Bank of Canada
4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104
Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via reply-email to to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager [email protected], with a cc-copy to (1) Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments (OBSI) via [email protected],
(2) Mr. Louis Vachon, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Bank,
President office via email to [email protected] and webmail-box at https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=President&action=69&lang=en)
(3) [email protected])
Dear Mr. Yau,
1) This is in response to your email to me, sent 25March2011, a copy of which is enclosed below.
2) Attached herewith is a response that I received on 21March2011 from your Email: President that stated- You can expect an answer from the National Bank WITHIN 24 HOURS. A copy of it is attached as NBCPresident21Marc2011Email.jpg.
3) I did NOT receive your response until 25March2011, which is 7 calendar days later, and most certainly NOT within the stipulated WITHIN 24 HOURS mentioned by your Email: President.
4) You mentioned: to meeting with me... I am suggesting either in the morning or in the afternoon on March 30, 2011
5) Presently, 30March2011 (before your branch closes at 430pm) does NOT suit me.
6) For an amount of $5, FOR WHICH I HAVE ALREADY PROVIDED YOU ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS IN WRITING,
(a) WHAT do you expect to feasibly and conceivably happen when it is an issue of your customer- service manager, Mr. Li s word against mine?
(b) What is going to be achieved at this meeting instead of needless arguing back-and-forth, with Mr. Li possibly stating that I made an error etc.?
(c) Net result: possibly NOTHING EXCEPT wasted time for me.
(7) THEREFORE, moving forward, as I mentioned earlier (in my email to you of 21March2011):
(a) In light of the incident occurrence detailed below, for the future, I want to exercise my legally permissible right to sign acknowledgement of my cash-withdrawal AFTER I MYSELF count and receive the cash, which also makes logical sense since an acknowledgement should be demanded AFTER and NOT BEFORE the ACTUAL transaction.
(b) This time (as in the past MULTIPLE times), it was DEMANDED by your branch representatives, that I sign the acknowledgement BEFORE I ACTUALLY RECEIVED AND COUNTED the cash.
(c) Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to receive them.
(8) You may be entitled to your records. And when we are dealing with matters OF MY MONEY, I [or any other customer] is entitled to my [his] legally valid records.
(9) My request is consistent with the governing legislations’, including the Bank Act, existing consumer protection and privacy laws that protect the public.
I (or any other customer) cannot be FORCED (and bullied) to sign documents and THEN REFUSED a copy of what you DEMAND me to sign.
(10) Please provide me a satisfactory WRITTEN response (via email to this email address and my postal-mail) within 7 calendar days of today, including whether you will provide me a copy of what I am legally entitled to, as per the law, and the Bank Act, i.e.
(a) sign acknowledgement of my cash-withdrawal AFTER I MYSELF count and receive the cash;
(b) a copy of my own signature, i.e. whatever documents you demand I sign, (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums)
************
To
Mr. Peter Yau,
National Bank of Canada
4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104
Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via email to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager [email protected], with a cc-copy to [email protected] and
cc: Mr. Louis Vachon, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Bank,
President office via webmail-box at https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=President&action=69&lang=en)
Dear Mr. Yau,
1) In light of the incident occurrence detailed below, for the future, I want to exercise my legally permissible right to sign acknowledgement of my cash-withdrawal AFTER I MYSELF count and receive the cash, which also makes logical sense since an acknowledgement should be demanded AFTER and NOT BEFORE the ACTUAL transaction.
2) This time (as in the past MULTIPLE times), it was DEMANDED by your branch representatives, that I sign the acknowledgement BEFORE I ACTUALLY RECEIVED AND COUNTED the cash.
3) Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to receive them.
4) Please provide me a satisfactory written response within 7 calendar days of today.
**********
To
Mr. Johnson Li, Customer Service Manager
National Bank of Canada
4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104
Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via email to [email protected] with a cc-copy to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager [email protected])
Dear Mr. Li,
(1) You forgot to give me the changed $5 bill (in return for the tattered $5 bill) when you returned to the branch-office-room with your and Mr. Yau s business-cards.
(2) Therefore, I actually got $1995 cash after I was told to sign the acknowledgement for having withdrawn $2000 cash today.
(3) I did not realize it either, until after I left the branch and it was closed for the day.
(4) Can you credit this $5 into my chequing-account?
(5) Please provide me a satisfactory written response within 7 calendar days of today.
(6) Thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation, and I apologize for any inconvenience that may have been caused to you.
************
To
Mr. Peter Yau, Branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager National Bank of Canada 4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104 Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via reply-email to to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager
[email protected], with a
cc-copy to (1) Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments (OBSI) via [email protected],
(2) Mr. Louis Vachon, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Bank, President office via email to [email protected] and webmail-box at https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=President&action=69&lang=en)
(3) [email protected])
Dear Mr. Yau, 1) This is in response to your email to me, sent 25March2011, a copy of which is enclosed below.
2) Attached herewith is a response that I received on 21March2011 from your
Email: President that stated- You can expect an answer from the National Bank
WITHIN 24 HOURS. A copy of it is attached as NBCPresident21Marc2011Email.jpg.
3) I did NOT receive your response until 25March2011, which is 7 calendar days later,
and most certainly NOT within the stipulated WITHIN 24 HOURS mentioned by your
Email: President.
4) You mentioned: to meeting with me... I am suggesting either in the morning or in the
afternoon on March 30, 2011
5) Presently, 30March2011 (before your branch closes at 430pm) does NOT suit me.
6) For an amount of $5, FOR WHICH I HAVE ALREADY PROVIDED YOU ALL THE
RELEVANT DETAILS IN WRITING,
(a) WHAT do you expect to feasibly and conceivably happen when it is an issue of your
customer- service manager, Mr. Li s word against mine?
(b) What is going to be achieved at this meeting instead of needless arguing back-and-forth,
with Mr. Li possibly stating that I made an error etc.?
(c) Net result: possibly NOTHING EXCEPT wasted time for me.
(7) THEREFORE, moving forward, as I mentioned earlier
(in my email to you of 21March2011):
(a) In light of the incident occurence detailed below, for the future, I want to exercise my
legally permissible right to sign acknowledgement of my cash-withdrawal AFTER I
MYSELF count and receive the cash, which also makes logical sense since an
acknowledgement should be demanded AFTER and NOT BEFORE the ACTUAL
transaction. (b) This time (as in the past MULTIPLE times), it was DEMANDED by your branch representatives, that I sign the acknowledgement BEFORE I ACTUALLY RECEIVED AND COUNTED the cash.
(c) Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature
(INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to receive them.
(8) You may be entitled to your records. And when we are dealing with matters OF MY
MONEY, I [or any other customer] is entitled to my [his] legally valid records.
(9) My request is consistent with the governing legilslations, including the Bank Act,
existing consumer protection and privacy laws that protect the public.
I (or any other customer) cannot be FORCED (and bullied) to sign documents and THEN
REFUSED a copy of what you DEMAND me to sign.
************
To
Mr. Peter Yau,
National Bank of Canada
4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104
Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via email to to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager [email protected], with a cc-copy to [email protected] and
cc: Mr. Louis Vachon, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Bank,
President office via webmail-box at https://www.nbc.ca/WebInfoWeb/DispatchRequest? aliasDispatcher=sendMailCommunicationEx&emailAlias=President&action=69&lang=en)
Dear Mr. Yau,
1) In light of the incident occurence detailed below, for the future, I want to exercise my legally permissible right to sign acknowledgement of my cash-withdrawal AFTER I MYSELF count and receive the cash, which also makes logical sense since an acknowledgement should be demanded AFTER and NOT BEFORE the ACTUAL transaction.
2) This time (as in the past MULTIPLE times), it was DEMANDED by your branch representatives, that I sign the acknowledgement BEFORE I ACTUALLY RECEIVED AND COUNTED the cash.
3) Furthermore, I understand that I am legally entitled to get a copy of my own signature (INCLUDING ANY referenced addendums) and THEREFORE, I would like to recieve them.
4) Please provide me a satisfactory written response within 7 calendar days of today.
*********
To
Mr. Johnson Li, Customer Service Manager
National Bank of Canada
4040 Finch Avenue East, Unit 104
Scarborough, ONT M1S 4VS
(Delivered via email to [email protected] with a cc-copy to branch-manager, i.e. sales and service manager [email protected])
Dear Mr. Li,
(1) You forgot to give me the changed $5 bill (in return for the tattered $5 bill) when you returned to the branch-office-room with your and Mr. Yau s business-cards.
(2) Therefore, I actually got $1995 cash after I was told to sign the acknowlegement for having withdrawn $2000 cash today.
(3) I did not realize it either, until after I left the branch and it was closed for the day.
(4) Can you credit this $5 into my chequing-account?
(5) Please provide me a satisfactory written response within 7 calendar days of today.
(6) Thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation, and I apologize for any inconvenience that may have been caused to you.
*********
0 comments