Bank Charges Financial Hardship Disussion

nothingwitty

Good morning all!

Last week I got a letter from my bank saying I would be charged the princely sum of £70 for debit card transactions that had gone through my account. I went to two supermarkets in one day and spend £20 between them. I called the bank and explained that I had paid by debit card as I was sure there were funds in my account. They claim that it's tough luck for me and that I should have taken better care of my account. I always thought that a debit card transaction could only go through if there were funds in the account but the bank said that supermarkets have their own thresholds which THEY authorise, not the bank, and they request the funds at a later point. Am very, very confused as debit cards transactions almost always appear as 'earmarked' debits when they are processed on my account i.e. the balance is reduced until the transaction is fully processed. Bank is refusing to cancel the charges and said I should understand how debit card system works. I thought I did??? Debit card: transaction successful if there is money in your account. If money is not there, transaction fails...

I am doing my very best NOT to undergo a a hardship claim, though am really struggling. They will cancel my overdraft and reduce me to a basic account if I do. I explained that I was doing my best to manage my account and that these charges were affecting me more and more but they just didn't care.

I am looking on the internet to see if there is any way I can appeal this as it is an agreement between the supermarkets and banks of which I had no idea but for which I am paying! The bank claims the above is explained in T&Cs but I never recall seeing anything about it, anywhere!

A word of warning to all to watch out for this pretty simple debit card trap...

Sappoo21

have sent my letter off hope something comes of it.

esmerellda

nothingwitty wrote: »

Good morning all!

Last week I got a letter from my bank saying I would be charged the princely sum of £70 for debit card transactions that had gone through my account. I went to two supermarkets in one day and spend £20 between them. I called the bank and explained that I had paid by debit card as I was sure there were funds in my account. They claim that it's tough luck for me and that I should have taken better care of my account. I always thought that a debit card transaction could only go through if there were funds in the account but the bank said that supermarkets have their own thresholds which THEY authorise, not the bank, and they request the funds at a later point. Am very, very confused as debit cards transactions almost always appear as 'earmarked' debits when they are processed on my account i.e. the balance is reduced until the transaction is fully processed. Bank is refusing to cancel the charges and said I should understand how debit card system works. I thought I did??? Debit card: transaction successful if there is money in your account. If money is not there, transaction fails...

I am doing my very best NOT to undergo a a hardship claim, though am really struggling. They will cancel my overdraft and reduce me to a basic account if I do. I explained that I was doing my best to manage my account and that these charges were affecting me more and more but they just didn't care.

I am looking on the internet to see if there is any way I can appeal this as it is an agreement between the supermarkets and banks of which I had no idea but for which I am paying! The bank claims the above is explained in T&Cs but I never recall seeing anything about it, anywhere!

A word of warning to all to watch out for this pretty simple debit card trap...

Floor limits - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_limit US article but same principles (am sure Nattie will explain more later)

Which bank are you with btw?

esmerellda

daz2bedebtfree wrote: »

my claim has been assigned to an officer of the financial ombudsman under hardship against lloyds tsb,
however ive just noticed that lloyds tsb have stuck a big default on my credit file , surely they cant be doing this as they know the accounts been in dispute since 2007 also i not6ice that they say i defaulted for £2323 my claim against them is for £2700any ideas folks :mad: also wish to point out that the bank closed my account when i offered them a payment arrangement to clear my overdraft

No they shouldnt have done that as the account is in dispute and you need to write and tell them so.

When the bank closed your account did they accept the payment plan and are you making payments? I think when you make arrangements to repay overdrafts they send you to collections thus closing use of the account.

If you want help with a letter to try get this default removed give me a yell.

esmerellda

jonpnash wrote: »

No, I didn't go to the FSO without the basic!!. The statistics section of my forum response are referring to a time when I actually incurred the charges. i.e. around 3-5 years ago. My financial difficulty situation, refers to my present situation. Of course, my other account is not in credit while claiming financial difficulty. Anyway, Co-op are not arguing that I am not in financial difficulty, this they acknowledge completely.
Would have been more helpful with regards to your response, is to give an answer to the main question, i.e. how can the bank can just do nothing, even when then acknowledge your financial difficulty. They argue that if you read the annex to the waiver, then all they are obliged to do is to treat your case sympathetically. Which in their case means just offering some financial advice from a financial advisor. Which doesn't really solve anything.

If you look a few posts back I pasted a letter form the FSA to the firms clarifying things like when refunds may be appropriate - some banks do more some do less but generally you only get a refund of charges incurred during or immediately before period of hardship and then only if you have severe priority debt/arrears.

As the charges are not yet unlawful they only have to abide by the banking code and FSA guidance to treat customers sympathetically basically. It does say they shouldnt offer more loans etc to get you further into debt but can do things like repayment arrangements, move you to basic accounts etc.

natweststaffmember

jonpnash wrote: »

No, I didn't go to the FSO without the basic!!. The statistics section of my forum response are referring to a time when I actually incurred the charges. i.e. around 3-5 years ago. My financial difficulty situation, refers to my present situation. Of course, my other account is not in credit while claiming financial difficulty. Anyway, Co-op are not arguing that I am not in financial difficulty, this they acknowledge completely.
Would have been more helpful with regards to your response, is to give an answer to the main question, i.e. how can the bank can just do nothing, even when then acknowledge your financial difficulty. They argue that if you read the annex to the waiver, then all they are obliged to do is to treat your case sympathetically. Which in their case means just offering some financial advice from a financial advisor. Which doesn't really solve anything.

Because you have no priority debt arrears is the answer to your question. I am sorry but I don't mess around with advice if I think you aren't in hardship as defined by the FSA Waiver plus with regards to how banks and the FOS are treating hardship cases. The banks' can do nothing because you are not from fear of losing your home(mortgage/.rent arrears), losing your liberty(council tax) or losing essential services(utilities). Sorry you don't like the response but there are people in more severe financial hardship who do have the basics.

nothingwitty

esmerellda wrote: »

Floor limits - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_limit US article but same principles (am sure Nattie will explain more later)

Which bank are you with btw?

I'm with money-grabbing Halifax.

norwichkaren

Sillybrit wrote: »

I just won £630 in a hardship case from Barclays - the account has been closed since 2004. It makes no difference whatsoever, they are still legally obliged to give you the information - if they do not, then don't hesitate in going on to the next step.

I have today rung to speak to the ICO and they say my complaint will take anything upto 3 months to be dealt with now as they have such a big backlog.

I have also logged a complaint with the FOS who are also working on anything upto a 180 day turnaround for complaints of this nature - thats 6 bloody months!

This is becomming slightly ridiculous now!

mrsdarbs

nothingwitty wrote: »

I'm with money-grabbing Halifax.

I'm with that lovely company too!!!:mad:

murphy06

I would just like to tell everyone that i was in a bit of difficulty with my bank, having to cancel direct debits and cheques bouncing through unforseen difficulty, so i decided to go down the route of bank charges through hardship, it is a bit of a pain having to fill out a income and expenditure form and send statements to the bank of creditors whom you owe money to, but it has paid off and it has only taken a couple of weeks, i have had a very quick response all around and they are willing to pay all my money back through a goodwill gesture, they have not delayed anything and thanks to NatWest i can dig myself out of a hole as they have also stopped interest on my account until the matter is fully resolved in court in October.