Could've seen this coming....

[GlosRFC]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7364422.stm

Even the bank's must've known this was the likely outcome but it appears they burying their heads in the sand hoping it all goes away. Now they will have to actually earn their profits instead of miking their customers - at least, they would if the Government didn't hand them £50 billion of our cash.


In the meantime they'll probably continue to slap these charges on people until the appeals process runs its course.

[Win2Win]

You shouldn't put yourself in a position to have to pay them anyway :thumbs

[GlosRFC]

That's not the point - nor is it particularly relevant to me.

I don't think that anyone would say that banks shouldn't be allowed to charge customers for the services they provide...the issue is how fair those charges are and whether the charge is a true reflection of the cost to a bank of a) allowing a customer to be overdrawn rather than in credit and b) sending them a letter.

Everyone, bar the banks themselves, is of the opinion that the charges are excessive and now a judge has agreed that the OFT can make (yet another) ruling on what a fair charge should be.

[Win2Win]

I think the profit markup in Harrod's are excessive, but they are not illegal.....you don't have to shop there though, the same as you don't have to go overdrawn! Personal choice.

[GlosRFC]

In the case of Harrod's you have plenty of choice. With banks, you'll find that the charges are all broadly the same. As for personal choice that doesn't exist when, for a lot of people, it's the charges that are creating and then exacerbating the overdrafts in the first place.

A proper analogy would be if Harrod's and every other High Street store charged you £30 just for looking in their shop window.

[Win2Win]

A proper analogy would be if Harrod's and every other High Street store charged you £30 just for looking in their shop window.
:doh

But if people managed finances correctly why would they get charged? Basically they are taking someone else's money without permission, and therefore that is technically theft, and they should be fined for it.

[sparkyminer]

Got to agree with Keith here.
There was some geezer on the radio today, telling how he'd got compensation from one bank, and was in the process of claiming charges back from 2 others.
How many effing accounts has he failed to run properly? It's all back to the blame culture. No one ever takes responsibility for their own actions. It's always someone else's fault. They really make my blood boil.;fire
The banks should tell the customers they can have their charges back but then they're not allowed to use their services anymore. See how long they'd last then.:butthead:

[GlosRFC]

I'm not disagreeing with either of you. Yes, people should be financially prudent but it's a fact of life that those who are usually the most prudent, i.e. on low incomes with kids, that are penalised more when they do incur charges.

And once again, the issue isn't over charging but the fairness of the charges. If they were genuinely fair, why have the banks quietly repaid more than £700 million?

[Win2Win]

But they are taking money from a business without permission! If you go into Woolworths (as if!!!), and just pick something up & walkout, you are stealing, and get knicked for £80 (should be a :censored: criminal record and shot!), the banks only fine you £30.....bargain :thumbs

[piggy]

of course the banks NEVER make mistakes :rolleyes: only the other day my son got a letter from his bank saying he was £6 overdrawn and as he had no overdraft agreed he was going to be charged £15 a DAY , the letter was dated 3 days earlier, he has no SO, no checkbook only a cashpoint card so how could he be overdrawn ??? it seems the bank had taken out bank charges early and that had made him overdrawn :yikes: if he hadn't gone down straight away and kicked off he could have ended up owing a fair bit.
£15 a day is a rediculous charge the banks should be forced to charge fairly enough of this "you know the T&C's" rubbish they are making over £4 billion a year out of these charges. i'm so glad for all of you that have never cocked up and never been broke but most of us have at some time or another struggled with our finances and these exorborant charges just make the situation worse. get what you can back from the bloodsucking scum.

[sparkyminer]

i'm so glad for all of you that have never cocked up and never been broke but most of us have at some time or another struggled with our finances and these exorborant charges just make the situation worse. get what you can back from the bloodsucking scum.

I have, many times Piggy, but when I did. I went down and did the following.:D
if he hadn't gone down straight away and kicked off he could have ended up owing a fair bit.

I have, on occassions, forseen potential problems and the bank put temporary arrangements in place to ensure I wasn't charged.

A lot of the problems are caused by a total disregard for their own and the bank's money. I stand by what I said earlier.:)

[TheOldhamWhisper]

You shouldn't put yourself in a position to have to pay them anyway :thumbs

Having been unwittingly screwed by my bank over the princely sum of 37p, I am personally looking forward to claiming back the resultant charges.

I don't exactly live hand to mouth but I do have an overdraft facility which I use on a regular basis. I have most bills paid by direct debit and all are geared to ensure that wages are in before the due dates.

Somehow, the direct debit for my TV License was presented for payment 3 days early (probably because of a Bank Holiday) but the mandate clearly states the date on which the payment is due. The result of this was that a check did not clear in time (one day late) and I exceeded my limit for the very first time to the tune of 37p. The Bank then reversed the Direct Debit and charged me £35 for the privelege. They sent me a letter confirming they had done this and charged me a further £20 for that. I went in and was told that the manager had 'discretion' to waive one charge per annum and that because it 'looked like an error had been made', he was willing to forgo the lesser of the 2 charges.

What happened next was simply a farce. The £35 charge came out of my account - on the same day that the TV License requested payment for the skipped payment. This put me back over limit by a couple of quid. This time, I was subject to an 'unauthorised' overdraft charge (apparently the first offence is free) of £50 and they also charged me £20 to write and let me know. That was on the 28th of the month - the letter also informed me that the £50 fee was payable for each calendar month that I was over limit - CALCULATED ON THE 1ST OF THE MONTH!!!!

All in all, the episode resulted in bank charges of over £270 - despite my protestations that the direct debit should not have been presented in the first place.

I was however told that I was within my rights to ask for the direct debit to be refunded and not paid until the due date :splapme

And all this happened just as they announced that they would be using a test case to decide the outcomes (about 18 months ago) and that any claims would be put on hold until then.

Well, pending appeals, get ready bank cos here I come!!! ;fire

[GlosRFC]

And sadly, lots of people unwittingly find themselves in the same position as TOW.

The argument that people are taking money illegally from a business is disengenous. If it were illegal, the banks could prevent it quite easily by not allowing anyone to go overdrawn. Instead, they happily close their eyes when people inadvertently slip into the red by £1 so they can slap £30-£50 in charges on them.

[Win2Win]

And shops could stop shoplifting by stopping people taking stuff as well. Simple.

[pilky201]

Martin Lewis the moneysaving expert told us 18 months ago the banks were shafting us now with this descsion by the courts it will open the floodgates for people to try and claim silly charges.But as Keith said its all down to your own doing for mismanaging your finances:Blacklistnonono:

[MattR]

This reminds me of a friend years ago who was terrible with his finances and continually overdrawn. Eventually he had a meeting with his bank manager and he said that the bank manager said to him that the bank would like to try something new with him whereby he banked with them rather than the other way around :D

I've got to say I'm largely with Keith on this. Yes I am sure there are many cases where the charges were unfair because of things coming out earlier than they should, or wages going in late etc. I also agree that some of the charges are definitely excessive and end up putting the account further overdrawn leading to more charges.

However most accounts have some kind of overdraft limit in place so they are already allowing you to go overdrawn in the first place. As Sparky said, if you know there is going to be a problem then talk to them before it happens. Exceeding the overdraft should incur penalties. They are after all effectively using other bank customers money.