Bank Charges - illegal?

ajbaker

Hi I have been keeping a close eye on this forum as I was recently charged £25 for a non-paid direct debit by American Express. While I would like to claim this back, I am a little sceptical as I have not noticed anyone on this forum taking action over such a (relatively) small amount. Are the courts less likely to be in my favour because the value is so small, or is it still possible to declare this as punitive? (Obviously all I got was a letter and I am sure this did not cost £25!)

Furthe, I would still love to see the Unfair Contracts Terms Act online. Does anyone have a link? While I have a lot of admiration for everyone who is fighting their case here, I am aware you are all working from only what is written here.

Frugal_Fox

Hi,

This link was in another thread - but I thought 'you' might like it too...

I've just been on the Halifax site and had a go, I chose to 'chain saw' their website... anyway I feel better now!

http://www.netdisaster.com/

Jarlawuk

I remember reading bout this canadian guy who fell out with his bank took revenge by paying lots and lots of 1 cent transactions to his credit card via internet banking :rotfl:

Paul_Herring

dchurch24 wrote:

My partner phoned Dell, to pay off her interest free agreement in full for her computer[...]
Anyway, she phoned up and paid with her debit card [...]
This was 3 weeks ago. Dell applied for the money today - she didn't have the £300 in her account today, so guess what? Yep, she'll be charged £35 for the privalidge of Abbey 'lending' her the money and going over her (very small) OD limit.

So your partner, realising of course, that Dell hadn't taken out the #300, decided to use that money? Or they didn't realise that Dell hadn't taken out the #300? Which?

Now how is it possible to budget when firms do this?

Simple - you just don't spend the #300. You treat that money as 'gone' regardless of whether it's in the account or not. How is it possible to spend the #300 twice? Your partner seems to have done this.

The knights templar would cash a cheque sooner than 3 weeks and that was 800 years ago. Are we not in the 21st century?

Paperwork goes missing, paperwork gets delayed. Your partner gave Dell permission to withdraw that #300. Just because they didn't take it immediately, isn't implicit permission for your partner to go and spend it twice.

It's time this campaign was stepped up - if people are not given a chance to be able to budget properly, then things need to change.

While I quite agree that the charges are extortionate, there is no excuse in *this*particular*case* for the account being overdrawn because a company had the audacity to withdraw funds late.

Tabs_2

ajbaker wrote:

Hi I have been keeping a close eye on this forum as I was recently charged £25 for a non-paid direct debit by American Express. While I would like to claim this back, I am a little sceptical as I have not noticed anyone on this forum taking action over such a (relatively) small amount. Are the courts less likely to be in my favour because the value is so small, or is it still possible to declare this as punitive? (Obviously all I got was a letter and I am sure this did not cost £25!)

Furthe, I would still love to see the Unfair Contracts Terms Act online. Does anyone have a link? While I have a lot of admiration for everyone who is fighting their case here, I am aware you are all working from only what is written here.

Hello,

As the charge was applied recently I would phone American Express and explain that, as it was a one-off, could they refund? It's definitely still a punitive charge but would it really be worth your time and effort taking this case to court?

Are these the links you were wanting? http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1074405689 and

http://www.oft.gov.uk/Consumer/Unfair+terms+in+contracts/default.htm

Hope that helps.

ajbaker

Thanks for the response and the links. I have already spoken with American Express who flat out refused to do anything for me. What really irritated me was the statement by the person I spoke to: "we apply this charge to ensure people manager their account properly." Almost an admission that it was punitive.

As for whether it is worth fighting... £25 may not be a lot of money, but it is certainly more to me than it is Amex. Surely the courts must decide on whether it is punitive or not, regardless of the amount in question.

Those links are new to me and look a little more official than those I have seen previously.

dchurch24

Paul_Herring wrote:

So your partner, realising of course, that Dell hadn't taken out the #300, decided to use that money? Or they didn't realise that Dell hadn't taken out the #300? Which?

Simple - you just don't spend the #300. You treat that money as 'gone' regardless of whether it's in the account or not. How is it possible to spend the #300 twice? Your partner seems to have done this.

Paperwork goes missing, paperwork gets delayed. Your partner gave Dell permission to withdraw that #300. Just because they didn't take it immediately, isn't implicit permission for your partner to go and spend it twice.
While I quite agree that the charges are extortionate, there is no excuse in *this*particular*case* for the account being overdrawn because a company had the audacity to withdraw funds late.

Sadly, the return of the 'your fault' gang.

My partner did not go overdrawn and was not charged for doing so - I assumed that she would be - she does not have an overdraft (well a tiny buffer OD).

She simply had paid a lot of things out of her account on that day - true to form, Abbey's on-line 'banking' hadn't recognised things that she KNEW had been paid and the money taken from her - so assumed (as that is the only point of reference she has) that Dell had taken their money too.

Her balance from the cash machine was roughly the correct amount it should have been if the payment had gone out. This was due to Abbey informing her that a cheque (from them to her) would clear on that same day she checked - it, of course hadn't cleared when they said it would, but in fact the next day (6 days later!).

So your partner, realising of course, that Dell hadn't taken out the #300

In fact, as quoted both here and in the my other post; she DIDN'T realise that Dell hadn't taken the money and has assumed that it had been taken. The first she knew that they hadn't taken the money was the letter she received. Please keep up. It's not brain surgery.

Paperwork goes missing, paperwork gets delayed. Your partner gave Dell permission to withdraw that #300. Just because they didn't take it immediately, isn't implicit permission for your partner to go and spend it twice.

In which case they would be in breach of their fudiciary duty - a serious offence.

While I quite agree that the charges are extortionate, there is no excuse in *this*particular*case* for the account being overdrawn because a company had the audacity to withdraw funds late.

No, you're quite right. We should sit about waiting for them for months and month, not living or eating or anything until the big friendly company has decided to take it's money from our account.

What if they ALL did this? How could anyone possibly know where they were financially?

If my paperwork went missing and I didn't accept payment for say, a service I had provided to a bank, would they be so lenient and say "oh well, paperwork goes missing from time-to-time" ? I doubt it.

Also, what on earth would Dell be doing conducting business with paper - they are a computer business - and more likely than most to conduct their financial affairs by computer - wouldn't you agree?

So basically, ironically, you have backed my argument up - banks cannot be trusted to inform you of your balance correctly at any time - couple that with firms that take money when they feel like it and, bang - there you have it - another person dragged into debt through charges etc...


PS. You may have your keboard set up for English-US and not UK, hence the £ coming out as a #.

dchurch24

ajbaker wrote:

Furthe, I would still love to see the Unfair Contracts Terms Act online. Does anyone have a link? While I have a lot of admiration for everyone who is fighting their case here, I am aware you are all working from only what is written here.

There is a link in the library at https://www.bankactiongroup.com.

Curry_Queen

dchurch24 wrote:

No, you're quite right. We should sit about waiting for them for months and month, not living or eating or anything until the big friendly company has decided to take it's money from our account.

Without wishing to opportion blame to either party, or get involved in any argument, I felt I had to comment on this particular statement

If you've already spent the money then no matter how long it takes the company to claim their funds from your account, it is already gone ... spent! I'm not sure where the "not living or eating" comes into it as presumably the expenditure has already been budgeted for, and was affordable, therefore there must be other funds available to live or eat with

If companies delay taking payment, then I'd look on it as an opportunity to earn a little bit of interest whilst it's still sitting in my account

dchurch24 wrote:

What if they ALL did this? How could anyone possibly know where they were financially?

If you keep track of income/expenditure ... which isn't difficult to do using a spreadsheet or programme like MS Money, or even a notebook and pencil! ... then surely you will know exactly how much you have available to spend regardless of the balance showing in your account at the ATM? (generic you/your)

I use MS Money to track all my finances and I know exactly to the penny what funds are available to me in every account, and I also know exactly when BGC's, DD and SO's are due etc. I would sooner check this than an online statement or ATM display to tell me what I have available. A quick cross reference to online statements will tell me whether there are any payments outstanding and who claimed what, and when

Just food for thought


Edit: just to add that surely it's only sensible to keep a close track of finances so you can spot any erroneous or fraudulent transactions as soon as they show up?

dchurch24

So it's perfectly fair for Dell to apply for the money 3.5 weeks later?

In this day and age it should be reasonable to expect on-line banking, teller staff and cash-points to tell the truth about a balance.

Why I should have to carry a notebook around with me to 'compliment' these services in the 21st century is beyond my comprehension.