MSE News: CONFIRMED - OFT gives up bank charges battle

UncleJaysus · 22 December 2009 at 1:47PM

KimYeovil wrote: »

The banks do not "rip off" the poor. Only rich people pay charges. A poor person does not have a spare £19.95 or £35 to pay. Therefore they do not allow themselves to incur charges.

What is wrong with poor customers being given a break and being supported by richer customers? You are completely contradicting yourself. Your contempt of the poor is an embarrassment to your avowed allegiance.

You think poor people don't pay charges?

C'mon now, take your head out of the sand.

MSE_Jenny · 22 December 2009 at 1:54PM

BBC News is urgently looking for a reclaimer with bank charges on hold to come into the studio this afternoon and talk about what’s happened to them.

You would need to be available at 4-30 – 6pm today. It would be at their studios in London, Manchester or Birmingham.

If your interested, please send me a private message with your name, phone number and where you’re based.

Thanks

Gorgeous_George · 22 December 2009 at 1:55PM

Ok, the case against the banks seems to be lost. This is a dead parrot.

Could we change direction to the unfairness of:

> speeding fines
> parking penalties (and charges in general)
> library fees (for returning books late)
> HMRC charges for late payments

Surely we would win some of those cases.

GG

desik · 22 December 2009 at 1:56PM

"Why should those who knew what the bank charges were, but carried on spending money that wasn't theirs, be rewarded retrospectively for their behaviour by the courts?"

It's typical that this poster, who has every right to express his opinion by the way, doesn't apply the same logic to the banks that have just been bailed out by us - maybe he's going to do that in a later ' The Banking System is Going to the Dogs ' post - whatever, the issue here, for me anyway, is fairness and social justice and historically many banks and other financial institutions have gone to great lengths to conceal from customers what their overdraft and other banking charges actually are.

Lets face it , the financial industry practically invented the ' hidden charge ' , as well as set rates totally out of proportion to the costs of providing overdrafts and other banking services to us.

The banks aren't being victimised here , they are being asked and expected to play fair but instead of showing any signs of voluntarily doing so, they've collectively brushed aside any notion that they should be grateful to the public for bailing them out, expressed outrage that the taxpayers stake in some banks is being perversely perceived by us as the public having some say in how they operate and treat us and even though everyone else is suffering from the recession the banks helped plunge us into they are still setting aside billions for obscene bonuses for bankers who would have ended up on the dole if the Government had not acted so swiftly to use our money to protect their jobs.

The unfairness of this goes well beyond banking charges, it raises serious questions about the type of society we live in .

Do we want to live in a society where those just about struggling to get by are routinely swindled or expected to pay for the mistakes of the rich and powerful ? I don't but that is where this society is at at the moment .

Yes, there are issues with the 'credit society ' but lets have a reality check here, we don't need to be lectured on the immorality of it by bankers, their supporters and the comfortably well off - who championed it because it suited them. Urgent reform of the banking system including tackling the obscene profits banks make out of overdraft charges should be an election issue , ordinary people should not be afraid to stand up for fairness .Feilding candidates for the Moneysavingsexpert Party would be a good way to let our politicians know that the bank charging issue is still alive and kicking.

moo_cow · 22 December 2009 at 1:58PM

Am astounded at kimyeovil's post. EXCUSE ME! If you don't mind me getting a point across here. I am now a poor person. I do not have enough money coming in to meet my basic day to day living expenses. we (3 of us) survive on less than £100 for a months groceries. And by the by, I did not incur ANY charges before our income was hit. So where on earth you're getting this rubbish about poor people not getting charges...........well it just defies belief that someone could make such a statement.

Gorgeous_George · 22 December 2009 at 1:59PM

Shamelessly copied from a Zopa chatroom:

Young Paddy bought a donkey from a farmer for £100.
The farmer agreed to deliver the donkey the next day.
The next day he drove up and said, 'Sorry son, but I have some bad news. The donkey's died.'

Paddy replied, 'Well then just give me my money back.'

The farmer said, 'Can't do that. I've already spent it.'

Paddy said, 'OK, then, just bring me the dead donkey.'

The farmer asked, 'What are you going to do with him?'

Paddy said, 'I'm going to raffle him off.'

The farmer said, 'You can't raffle a dead donkey!'

Paddy said, 'Sure I can. Watch me .......... I just won't tell anybody he's dead.'

A month later, the farmer met up with Paddy and asked, 'What happened with that dead donkey?'

Paddy said, 'I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two pounds apiece and made a profit of £898'

The farmer said, 'Didn't anyone complain?'

Paddy said, 'Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two pounds back.'

Paddy now works for LloydsTSB !!!!

GG

orc_2 · 22 December 2009 at 2:16PM

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

Shamelessly copied from a Zopa chatroom:

GG

Yes, and he works selling securities and such, which is much the same as that chap flogging that dead donkey of yours.

Spiggle · 22 December 2009 at 2:17PM

...and ignore him please.

I just wanted to say a couple of things which sadly aren't very positive.

Firstly, how come I had a letter dated 21st December 2009 this morning from Barclays telling me that "We are .. not upholding your complaint and will not be refunding the bank charges you have complained about." when as far as I'm aware the news from OFT was only announced today? Sort of rhetorical question really as its all to do with back room dealings.

Secondly, I'd love to truly believe that we 'little' people could unite as a force against these people but you only have to look at the ignored millions that marched against the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan (and the slaughter of tens of thousands mostly civilian and including allied miltary forces) compared to the actual decisions taken to go to war as reported at the current Inquiry to know that we sadly have no effect.

Thirdly and finally, I came to my senses last month and realised there is no such thing as loyalty in the finance industry (I can remember having conversations with people who were the Manager of the local bank branch) and after 23 years am in the process of switching from Barclays (where I paid £16 per month to use my account and interest when using my agreed OD facility) to Alliance & Leicester.

Thanks to MSE for pointing out the error of my ways (still can't believe I paid £192 per annum for my account and never questioned it!) and for the links and news that enabled me to at least earn something back for a change with £50 cashback from Quidco and £100 from A&L.

It is ridiculous that this case has ended like this and I have been hugely angry about the corrupt manner in which our system works - where a bailed out bank can still pay huge bonuses and make huge profits when the 'little' people are redundant, struggling, living in poorly heated and insulated properties, and struggle to eat and feed their families - and all I can do is my own 'little' things to help.

Just think of the difference that could be made to millions of lives if the bail out funds or the billions spent on killing people in Iraq and Afghanistan had been invested in supporting the people that live in Britain now (proper housing, insulation, energy efficient housing/improvements, local combined heat and power, even public transport) and the benefits that would be gained for those who will live here in the future. But we have democracy and we love it ... don't we?

kittiej · 22 December 2009 at 2:20PM

Alex I think it tends to be because of the charges on top of charges that racks the debts up.

If I incurred £35 charges I would think oh heck I've gone OD on my OD Ishall pay it and be more carefull in future.

If however Mrs Brown down the road had the same charges and couldn't pay them off (due to whatever hardship) the bank would slap more charges on top and then the downward spiral begins.

There are people on here who literally have a few pounds a week for food, after they've paid their bills and so the slightest thing can become a major issue.

If banks would put a stop to this charging on charges then a lot of people would be in a better position to help themselves or at least live an existence.

A lot of people have found themselves with short working weeks, or worse made redundant and it might not be just a case of visiting a job centre to get another job

orc_2 · 22 December 2009 at 2:33PM

kittiej wrote: »

Alex I think it tends to be because of the charges on top of charges that racks the debts up.

If I incurred £35 charges I would think oh heck I've gone OD on my OD Ishall pay it and be more carefull in future.

If however Mrs Brown down the road had the same charges and couldn't pay them off (due to whatever hardship) the bank would slap more charges on top and then the downward spiral begins.

There are people on here who literally have a few pounds a week for food, after they've paid their bills and so the slightest thing can become a major issue.

If banks would put a stop to this charging on charges then a lot of people would be in a better position to help themselves or at least live an existence.

A lot of people have found themselves with short working weeks, or worse made redundant and it might not be just a case of visiting a job centre to get another job

Completely agree with the sentiments in your thoughtful post.

If a family is on a fixed income of say £200, for arguments sake, and they get charges of 2 x £35, ie £70, then that is £70 they don't have off the next weeks income, which it follows would effectively be £130.

Obviously, given the fact everyone has priority bills, that is in danger of snowballing and setting in motion a chain of misery. There are hundreds of thousands of people in that position who have documented the impact on reclaim sites.

MSE News: CONFIRMED - OFT gives up bank charges battle

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free