How will reclaiming bank charges impact banking discussion

mum2one wrote: »

Surely in theory banks make a profit from mortgage payments and loans, they certainly do not pay that much out back in interest,

Thats where they should be getting their profit from, not from bank charges.

Yes, I know we all signed the terms and conditions, but how many of us actually read the small print when we opened the accounts, we trusted the banks.

they make a profit on the interest alone mum let alone the charge they have imposed.

Talk about reading small print. i read the T & C's attached to our new bank account, crossed several out, signed dated and got the alterations witnessed. Set them back and guess what, new bank opened. Who reads the returned T & C's? Thisaccount has been operated since October 2006 without one penalty charge.

TANZARELLI wrote: »

Ok Ivan you really cant grasp this can you. Perhaps I should make it a bit clearer.

Have a read of the link below and you may, just may, grasp it. The BBC Whistleblower programme highlighted a system used by Yorkshire bank called CYNthesys - Clydesdale Yorkshire Northern the system. It showed the true costs of the bank to be less than £2.00.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/yorkshire-bank-clydesdale-bank/78681-clydesdale-yorkshire-northern-system.html

This was on the assumption that the process was done manually which we all know it is not.

I have never read such a crock in all my life ... if this is the sort of rubbish you are basing your informaiton on I can understand why you are so far off the mark. I did not see the programme therefore can not comment on its findings however given the contents of the link and the shoddy state of British journalism these days I would be inclined to think it was not exactly an unbiased piece of work. Many consumer programmes these days seems to set out their conclusions and then go and find evidence that supports that while conveniently ignoring or hiding any evidence to the contrary.

To convince yourself of this crock, do a simple test yourself .. try it with your own computer ... set a stop watch when you turn it on and stop it when you have brought up your account details through the web. You will have had to go through fewer security checks and signons than the average operator ... if you can do it in 26 seconds (as the article you linked to suggests then I will be more than surprised). Let me fill in some blanks based on the configuration a partiucular bank enforced on my PC

A100 - switch on computer - 10 standard seconds (LMFAO)
- wait until it fires up and runs basic security checks
- at logon screen enter user id and password
- wait until various network connections are made and further security is run
- fire up virtual machine that allows connection to mainframe
- once booted up enter logon details and wait for security checks to complete and network connections to be made
- start terminal emulator and wait for it to initialise (alternatively could be something like GT7)
- enter user id and password to reach main screen
- navigate the menu options and select the appropriate production system
- enter more user id and logon details (optional)
- navigate menu to appropriate place

A101 - retrieve customer record - 4 standard seconds
A102 - data entry - 3 key strokes - 4 standard seconds
A103 - retrieve sub-record - 2 standard seconds
A104 - data entry - 12 keystrokes - 6 standard seconds

The timings for rest of it are plausible except for one detail (and it is a biggie) ... in the main charges are generally not added to accounts by operators, they are all done automatically by the system that follows a set of pre-programmed rules, as is the sending of most letters (the cost of the operator is not relevant) ... an operator will generally only look at an account if a call is made to the call centre or the account is flagged for some reason .. a significant proportion of accounts have never been looked at by a human being (despie receiving regular communications)

You are really dreaming in an attempt to convince others that recaliming UNLAWFUL bank charges is selfish.

Now you are getting all hormonal again .. they are not 'unlawful' ... that has yet to be determined in a court ... at worst they may be considered as 'unfair', but then that is a matter of opinion.

Your comparisons are nowhere near a true reflection of the process involved in bank charge letters as you and your previous project was nothing like a huge multi national organisation like the banks are so your whole arguement is flawed.

:rotfl: I assume you are basing this detailed analysis on the same quality of information detailed above. In a way though you are right, it is not a true reflection because the true reflection would require several manuals of thousands of pages to describe (not a few basic postings) ... I am sure some of the companies I have worked for will be interested to learn that some poster on a chatboard considers that they are not 'huge multi national organisations like the banks'.

You made a good attempt to nail this but failed.

Tanz, I don't want to be rude but my job for the last 20+ years has been in the design and development of such systems (both in the banking and non-banking sectors .. just to clarify something GD said, for the last two years I have not been working in the banking sector but as of September it looks like I will be sub-contracted to a bank again). I specialise in high volume data capture and batch processing systems .. I have little interest in processing a few dozen accounts (although have designed various web based solutions) but when it comes to processing 10's of thousands or even millions of accounts ... that is what I do.

You are basing most of what you say on hearsay and make believe 'facts', in some cases blatant myth and in this case what appears to be sensationalist journalism (don't be taken in by it). If you have specific questions please PM me and I will answer and explain, but I cannot put 20 years of knowledge in a few simple posts.

Ivan

IvanOpinion wrote: »

I have never read such a crock in all my life ... if this is the sort of rubbish you are basing your informaiton on I can understand why you are so far off the mark. I did not see the programme therefore can not comment on its findings however given the contents of the link and the shoddy state of British journalism these days I would be inclined to think it was not exactly an unbiased piece of work. Many consumer programmes these days seems to set out their conclusions and then go and find evidence that supports that while conveniently ignoring or hiding any evidence to the contrary.

To convince yourself of this crock, do a simple test yourself .. try it with your own computer ... set a stop watch when you turn it on and stop it when you have brought up your account details through the web. You will have had to go through fewer security checks and signons than the average operator ... if you can do it in 26 seconds (as the article you linked to suggests then I will be more than surprised). Let me fill in some blanks based on the configuration a partiucular bank enforced on my PC

The timings for rest of it are plausible except for one detail (and it is a biggie) ... in the main charges are generally not added to accounts by operators, they are all done automatically by the system that follows a set of pre-programmed rules, as is the sending of most letters (the cost of the operator is not relevant) ... an operator will generally only look at an account if a call is made to the call centre or the account is flagged for some reason .. a significant proportion of accounts have never been looked at by a human being (despie receiving regular communications)
Now you are getting all hormonal again .. they are not 'unlawful' ... that has yet to be determined in a court ... at worst they may be considered as 'unfair', but then that is a matter of opinion.
:rotfl: I assume you are basing this detailed analysis on the same quality of information detailed above. In a way though you are right, it is not a true reflection because the true reflection would require several manuals of thousands of pages to describe (not a few basic postings) ... I am sure some of the companies I have worked for will be interested to learn that some poster on a chatboard considers that they are not 'huge multi national organisations like the banks'.
Tanz, I don't want to be rude but my job for the last 20+ years has been in the design and development of such systems (both in the banking and non-banking sectors .. just to clarify something GD said, for the last two years I have not been working in the banking sector but as of September it looks like I will be sub-contracted to a bank again). I specialise in high volume data capture and batch processing systems .. I have little interest in processing a few dozen accounts (although have designed various web based solutions) but when it comes to processing 10's of thousands or even millions of accounts ... that is what I do.

You are basing most of what you say on hearsay and make believe 'facts', in some cases blatant myth and in this case what appears to be sensationalist journalism (don't be taken in by it). If you have specific questions please PM me and I will answer and explain, but I cannot put 20 years of knowledge in a few simple posts.

Ivan

Fu**** ell you dont half ramble sh** ivan....how is it hearsay ya daft git..evidential proof on the Terry -v- LLoydsTsb will spell out your rambling crap sorry but i think its u that needs to get a grip and file your nails!

TANZARELLI wrote: »

If free banking comes to an end as a result of the charges issue then so be it. At least the banks wont be fleecing often vulnerable people who may be on limited incomes as they see them as easy prey.

In my post above I mentioned about some of the 'myths' and have singled this one out as an example. Have you consulted some of the people at the lower end of the market to see if they would be happy if free banking came to an end? Many people at the lower end of the market are the ones that will have to pay while those on £1000+ per month will continue to get their banking free. Many at the lower end struggle and try to be responsible with their money .. but may find out that they are now going to be charged an additional (e.g.) £10 per month that they may not be able to afford ... for what .. because somebody championed them not having to pay charges that they did not pay already (because they just about made ends meet)? Many people at the lower end that do go over drawn will not only have to pay for their account but may pay significantly higher interest rates.

This has not been thought out .. people are jumping on a me-me-me bandwagon without a care for those at the lower end of the market .. until they are asked to justify why they are doing something. As I keep saying, when all is said and done, the banks will not lose (or at least I hope not otherwise my pension is up the creek) ... the biggest losers will probably be those who do not earn enough the get the 'perks' that bigger earners will rightly get (after all it is their money). But then I suggest people are assuming what others may or may not want based on what suits their own individual purposes .. why have we not asked what do people really want.

ivan