Halifax - allowed to go over overdraft then penalised again and again and again..

kamheed

Hi,

I have a Halifax current account, which has an overdraft limit of £1250.

I play poker online. A few days ago i decided to use some of the little credit i had in my halifax overdraft to deposit some money to play with online. I withdrew £15 (i always withdraw £15 at a time, no more no less) - over the course of a few days I withdrew winnings several times, then bought back in again several times having gone bust again.

I never checked to see what the situation was with my credit. I reasoned that if I had no money, then my card would be rejected by the online banking system. This seemed straightforward as this has always happened in the past (during xmas i though i had cash on my halifax card but it rejected by the ladbrokes online banking system, and this has always happened, many times before).

I got a letter today, advising of a £35 charge for each deposit that I'd made from my halifax account which was taken when i'd had no funds. this happened 8 times which means in charges alone, i now owe £280 + their standard £28 unauthorised overdraft fee.

I went into a branch today and argued my case - how could they allow me to go over my limit time and time again - especially considering the fact that as far as i was concerned it shouldve been simply rejected.

i've been told that its apparently a quirk of ladbrokes banking system and their 'front office systems / levels of authorisation / blah blah blah' that means that not all payments are put through authorisation by the 'retailer' which means that the money is always payed by the bank (in this case halifax). they say that although in the past this has never happened, the limit which ladbrokes/a retailer sets can change and that this mustve happened recently.

ive just tried my barclays debit card, which is also maxed out. it got declined.

have i got a leg to stand on? at least in the meantime it seems i'll have to pay these charges, which i can not afford. is it possible to freeze/dispute/not pay them?

does the fact that i reclaimed back charges accumulated during my uni years about a year ago make it a no-goer? ('when you claimed back your charges last year you signed a form saying you agreed to these charges' - the charges were never £35 a pop if i recall rightly).

Please help. this is causing me no end of distress.

thanks for reading,

kam

kamheed

thanks for the reply.

.. is there anyone kind enough who can help with the banking issues at hand?

Kavanne

Yeah... stop gambling and you're sorted.

kamheed

.. i realise that im not getting much sympathy here because of the reason why these transactions occured.

the fact is, my winnings have taken my below my overdraft limit, its the fact that i went over it before i'd cashed out my winnings and rebought during the period before the winnings had cleared that has caused the problem.

as of today, i am (just) within my overdraft by about £20. but these charges are due to be incurred next month.

my point is - surely this is a fault of the system i.e. i shouldnt have been able to make these payments. i understand that its a conscious decision to try to make a payment, but surely the bank is the actual authorising lender (i.e. they decide if they will lend) and my query RELATES to why ive been able to go over the mutually agreed lending limit.

theyre saying its the banking system of the retailer, which has proved NOT to be the case as explained.

can anyone actually help with the banking issue?

any additional facetious comments not welcome.

kamheed

loaner - this is besides the point.

if this is the case, why is the card rejected if i try to make a payment over the counter?

why is another bank card from another bank declined? considering this is their reason for this occurring, does it not mean my questioning is reasonable?

i dont dispute that i tried to spend money i didnt (at least didnt realise) have. and although we can debate whose fault it is (ultimately it will always be my fault for having an overdraft/borrowing in the first place if you want to argue it to the extreme) i would rather try to understand theyre argument and how this has happened, especially in the context of the answer that they have given me i.e. it dont stand up.

loaner - your comments are far from useful. i dont have a gambling problem, i rarely play. fact is on this occasion over the days i ended up up although as i have stated this is besides the point. i dont take it seriously, it was just a bit of fun.

if you dont actually have anything useful to say, please don't post again. and find something more constructive to do with your time. or at least find another way to bolster your own self esteem and pride by bothering someone else.

thanks,

kamheed

i didnt like your answer because it didnt relate to the actual question.

i have a charge problem. if i was worried about the general status of my financial position i would be at the debt free wanabee board posting.

none of your replies have been constructive. anyone reading them can see that.

please leave me alone.

sophie21

We are here for help not 'slap on the wrist by the headmaster'. It really is very unhelpful to post 'agressive replies'. We are all equals and i'm sure Martin Lewis would expect to see compassion when people are experiencing difficult times

Cat695

sophie21 wrote: »

We are here for help not 'slap on the wrist by the headmaster'. It really is very unhelpful to post 'agressive replies'. We are all equals and i'm sure Martin Lewis would expect to see compassion when people are experiencing difficult times

I'm not having ago but

what your saying is lets make the person feel better everytime they get into debt then tell them how they can fiddle the system to get the money back that THEY used which isn't theirs therefore RAISING the costs for the rest of us?

Giving someone a slap on the wrist and actually pointing out its their fault and only their fault might actually be a good thing (the bank didn't actually send him an email telling him to gamble did it).

people complain when costs rise....costs rise because companies are just getting back what other people don't pay back...ie you and me

Sandieflowers

My son had the same problem with A&L when they applied what they called a 'ghost overdraft' to his account (he did not take up their original offer of an overdraft when he opened the account). His transaction took him a very small amount over his balance and like you he persumed it would be declined if there were insufficinet funds.

His oversight cost him alot in bank charges which if he hadn't paid would have kept increasing.

He paid the charges and closed his account and then started the relcaim process. I understand your situation is different because you have an overdraft so I don't think closing your account is an option.

I don't know if you can relcaim charges for a second time so I can't acutally answer the question you came to the forum with, just wanted to let you know that somebody understands how this can happen and I think your card transaction should have been declined.

Best of luck.

kamheed

cat,

it has nothing to do with gambling, i regret putting it in there because its taken away from my point.

i have no argument if id wrote a cheque, or if the interest had carried me over.

my problem is with the fact they have allowed me to make a purchase which in all other cases previously they havent.

furthermore, the explanation they have given me does not prove to be the case.

a helpful answer to this question may benefit many more, who may be discouraged from appealing against bank decisions in instances where the charges do not seem justified. i also dont see how any of the issues related to my posting have anything to do with 'charges for others'!!!?? this is muddying the issue even more so than it has been so far.

i understand (TO ALL FUTURE POSTERS) that i entered a transaction online (regardless if it was for something as seemingly distasteful as playing poker for fun) - the crux is, why have they in this instance allowed me to do so? in order to penalise me for it again and again?

its surely a point of consumer interest to understand how this can be justified.

TO ALL FUTURE POSTERS - its the actual nature of the transaction i am querying, rather than the personal reasons for it that my query relates to.

can someone actually help rather than pour scourn (no matter how seemingly righteous/self righteous it is).

kamheed

thanks sandie.

i appreciate the helpful, and non judgemental, contribution.

sincerely appreciated (i feel slightly less cynical than i did 2 minutes ago)