My son is a student and had two accounts with Lloyds TSB, one a day-to-day account, the other to pay accommodation bills. In August, when the bills account was dormant because it was holiday time, he was charged for going overdrawn.

He investigated and was told that a direct debit to Privacy Guard, Lloyds TSB’s credit fraud package, had taken him overdrawn. He had not taken out this policy. I visited his bank manager for an explanation. He said that my son had taken out the policy. My son wrote to complain after the manager refused to resolve it. He was told there was no record of the transaction and that my son should approach Privacy Guard. But he was offered a refund of £10 for “inconvenience”.

After six weeks, Privacy Guard has admitted that it also has no record of any transaction. It looks as if someone set up a Privacy Guard policy without my son’s permission. I strongly believe that students are a soft target for banks.

Martin Garvey, Nottingham

You were told twice that there was no record of the form. Strangely, Lloyds TSB managed to lay its hand on it after Troubleshooter called. Your son did sign a direct debit mandate for Privacy Guard at a branch. However, this does not exonerate Lloyds from a) failing to make it clear that this was not what your son was signing at the time, and b) not taking Privacy Guard to task itself.

First, banks know that students do not know much about money, which is a huge advantage to them when asking students to sign forms for “credit fraud packages”, which to most 18-year-olds mean about as much as “credit-swap derivatives” do to the rest of us. To most students, the first meeting with the bank manager is their initiation into how rubbish adulthood can be because it leads to the inevitable realisation that the world is trying to fleece you at every turn. Your son has learnt this the hard way, but at least, thanks to Troubleshooter’s intervention, you have taught him that it is possible to fight back and win. Lloyds TSB has cancelled the policy, waived the charges, and credited his account with £10 to cover the debits.

Second, the case illustrates one of the fundamental problems with outsourcing — the distance it creates between the bank and responsibility, to the customer’s detriment. It makes Troubleshooter wonder why there aren’t consumer protection rules that lay out clearly the responsibility of companies to resolve such problems.

Costly moving fiasco

I recently rented a property in Camden through Chesterton Humberts. Even though our lease was due to end on October 4, we requested a start date for the tenancy of September 26 to give us time to co-ordinate our move. The agent contacted us to say that the landlord was having second thoughts and wanted us to start the lease on September 19. The reason was that she had been approached by other agents offering higher rent. We reluctantly agreed to pay for an additional week.

The agent calculated the amounts owed for the deposit and rent, and I signed the direct-deposit forms.

The moving day was a fiasco. The agreed work to replace sliding glass doors was scheduled for the same day as our move, the house was not professionally cleaned, and the interior was faded and scuffed. I had asked the estate agent to paint the interior before we moved in.

I then received an e-mail from Chesterton stating that the amounts owed were miscalculated and we owed a further £96.16. Why is Chesterton’s bad maths my problem? It threatened me with a black mark on my credit report.

Mark Solomon, North London

The lettings market currently favours landlords over tenants and you appear to have been the victim of a demand-and-supply imbalance in the market. In other words, landlords and letting agents do not have to satisfy your every whim because tenants are two-a-penny, and nice, reasonably-priced flats are not.

After Troubleshooter rang, you received a personal apology from David Adams, head of residential at Chesterton Humberts. He has waived the £96.10 charge and has sent you and your wife a bottle of wine to welcome you to your new home — no mention of whether this is Hardy’s or Chateauneuf-du-Pape.

Cleaner credit record I have a Marks & Spencer charge card. Eight years ago I missed payments every month, which showed on my credit record. At the time I did not understand the ramifications of my credit record. I wised up and closed the account four years ago. I was issued with a new card and I now pay off my balance every month. However, the missed payments from eight years ago still appear on my credit record. I asked M&S to remove the marks, which it initially agreed to do, but has since backtracked and is refusing to amend my record.

Jeremy Ross, North London

Missed payments appear on a credit record for six years from when the account is settled, so as you closed the account 4½ years ago, the marks should appear for a further 18 months.

After Troubleshooter called, M&S admitted that it had given you mixed messages and agreed to change the late payments to a “U” status on your credit record, which means “unknown”. All negative marks have therefore been removed. It has also credited your account with £50 as a gesture of goodwill.

Readers to the rescue

Where can I insure my iPhone?

I recently bought an Apple iPhone, but didn’t realise until it was too late that you can buy the tailored O2 insurance only up to 28 days after the date you acquire your phone. I now don’t have any protection. Is it still worth me shelling out for insurance? I’m worried that I won’t be able to get suitable cover on a non-O2 policy. Where should I look?”

markus johansson I bought a new iPhone a few months ago and purposely opened a bank account with Lloyds TSB for its phone insurance. It will insure an iPhone on its basic policy. I would go into the branch to set this up.

Elizabeth Danon £25 voucher winner

Most home-contents insurance policies will already cover your iPhone quite sufficiently for loss and accidental damage. However, be wary of what sort of excess you could be paying; accidental damage will incur a higher excess fee. Insurance is a must. Apple’s warranty, while good, will not cover you for the dreaded and mysterious “water damage” scenario and O2’s repair service will cost you a whopping £140, though it does provide you with a new handset. Abbas Muadib At the time of buying my iPhone from the friendly staff at the only retailer that O2 would allow to sell the device, I was told that they, and no one else, were able to insure this chunk of Apple wizardry. It was with great delight that I informed them that as a Barclays Premier customer I had inquired whether it covered the iPhone. It turns out that Barclays does — it even had a special clause. Not only that but its level of cover is superior to that offered by O2.

James Doyle

Customers with a NatWest Advantage Gold current account can insure a mobile phone — two with a joint account — for nothing. You register online and iPhones are specifically mentioned.

Andrew Paterson

Expert’s view

James Parker, Mobiles manager at moneysupermarket.com
Replacing an iPhone can be expensive so it makes sense to have cover in place. Standalone mobile insurance will cost about £6 a month; just ensure that it covers fraudulent calls as well as the handset. Alternatively, add your phone to your home-contents insurance, though it may not cover fraudulent calls.

Can you help?

E-mail troubleshooter@thetimes.co.uk with your answer to the following problem for the chance to win a £25 bonusbond.com multi-store voucher.

My 91-year-old grandmother has asked me to open a postal or online savings account for her. However, all the institutions I have approached insist on proof of identity, either with a passport or driving licence, neither of which she has. Can anyone advise on an alternative form of ID?

Nicola Noller

Your shout

Buy-to-let

A news story headlined “Investors with ready cash and an eye for repossessions revive buy-to-let market” sparked sharp debate this week at Times Online.

Many readers felt that talk of a revival was far-fetched, despite comment and statistics from experts.

For example, Chris Benbow wrote: “So, property is booming again? Well, according to the people who will make money if property takes off.

“It’s amazing that the media reports this stuff without question or criticism. In 2010 we will have tax rises and public spending cuts, and will see an increase in unemployment. Obviously these things will cause house prices to rise.”

Mike C was also cynical. He wrote: “So, property is cheap ‘compared with the peak in 2007.’ Says it all really — the only way in which the vested interest brigade can make property sound cheap is by comparing it to the ludicrously high levels that got us into this mess in the first place.”

Meanwhile, Nick Gillingham questioned a statistic from Allsop, the property auctioneer. He wrote: “I don’t know where Allsop gets this 7.96 per cent yield figure [its average rental yield figure for assured short-hold tenancies in London] from.

“The only properties I have that yield at that level are ex-local authority. My mid-market properties typically yield between 4 per cent and 5 per cent.”

James C, however, felt that the market was on the up. He wrote: “Many arguments here are based on an assumption that 2007 was so high that a downward correction of perhaps 35 per cent was required. Hence, as we’ve not had a 35 per cent correction, we should expect a further correction.

“This could be wrong. It currently looks like rents are going up so we’ll see more buy-to-let entrants. It does not look like there will be a further downward correction.

“Obviously it would be nicer if house prices were lower, but there comes a point when you have to look at the facts.”

There was further reader comment on a second news story that said that rents could rise sharply because of a lack of properties available to let.

Mike C wrote: “I’m confused. We’ve been told ad nauseam that house prices are rising because of a shortage of homes on the market as people turn landlord to avoid accepting what their place is really worth. Now we’re told there’s a shortage of rental stock as people put up their homes for sale. Which is it?”

Money letters

Wanted: B&B closure Sir, I, unfortunately, purchased 1,000 Bradford & Bingley shares in April 2006 at £4.96 a share. In August 2008 I compounded my error by falling for the attractive but, with hindsight, highly suspicious rights issue, purchasing a further 1,340 shares at 55p a share. One month later the bank collapsed and the shares were suspended at 20p.

More than a year has passed. Why does it take so long for the administrators to bring closure to so many long-suffering B&B shareholders?

Jeremy Harker
Via e-mail

Airmiles turbulence

Sir, I had the same problem as your correspondent where my Airmiles “disappeared” (Troubleshooter, “Airing a complaint”, October 10). I e-mailed Airmiles, too, and got a reply to the effect “too bad”. I wrote, and my miles have been reinstated, but if I make a booking I will be charged a £30 admin fee — even though I did not know that my account was about to lapse.

Please could you put some pressure on Airmiles to withdraw the £30 admin charge for taking away people’s Airmiles without their prior knowledge.

Mrs D. Little
Via e-mail

Pass on Pay Pass

Sir, I received my Barclaycard with PayPass a year ago (“Can you trust wave-and-go cash cards?”, Times Money, October 24). As soon as I found out what PayPass was, I contacted Barclays and had it dectivated. I was told at the time that any number of purchases could be made each day provided they are under £10 by touching the card on the terminal. There was no mention of a “counter” [that records how often the card is used].

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that some banks’ counters will be set at £50, because when the fraudster reaches this he or she will throw the card away, and the customer will be liable for all the fraud and the bank none. This is a recipe for yet more fraud, albeit on a smaller scale per customer.

It seems the banks have got to a stage where they are willing to accept fraud on a minor scale (paid for by their customers) in return for more business.

As regards it being as safe as online purchases, at least each of those purchases have an address attached, but contactless technology purchases are anonymous.

Michael Ball
Via e-mail

On the bright side

Melanie Marchetti of Stoke-on-Trent wrote in response to last week’s Troubleshooter letter about First Direct. She says: “Having recently arranged the same product with First Direct, our experience was very different. It was clearly explained that we needed to open different savings accounts in order for our savings to be offset against the mortgage. Two accounts were opened for us that day. It is, of course, our responsibility to move the money at the correct time.

The service we received could not have been easier to understand.”