Banks refunding all charges - how much of a boost would it be for the UK economy?

bruirn

If all bank charges were to be refunded tomorrow how much money are we talking about collectively? Surely that injection of funds into consumers' pockets would be be a major shot in the arm for the economy.

boydE

I very much doubt the banks will have to pay out due to the current climate.

bruirn

boydE wrote: »

I very much doubt the banks will have to pay out due to the current climate.

I'm afraid you could well be right. It's just that I'm always hearing of schemes that people put forward to help get people spending again and I was just wondering if addressing the bank charges issue would be a possible solution.

slim1982

i totally agree wat a help it would be to everyone but very doubtful

oldwiring

As taxpayers, who are bailing out the banks as a result of their irresponsibility, is the OP really suggesting that we give effectively some of that money to others who in many cases have been irresponsible themselves?:rolleyes:

piggeh

Irresponsible, maybe. unfairly punished, yes (it should have only covered their costs as a penalty charge). You reckon the banks are more deserving of the cash themselves when they've been a little bit more irresponsible in their lending?!

dunstonh

piggeh wrote: »

Irresponsible, maybe. unfairly punished, yes (it should have only covered their costs as a penalty charge). You reckon the banks are more deserving of the cash themselves when they've been a little bit more irresponsible in their lending?!

a lot of people have the mistaken view that bank charges are wrong and unlawful and wont exist after the bank case. That is not correct. They will continue and the banks have already adjusted and repackaged the charges to ensure they are now lawful. Often, people incurring charges now are actually paying more than they were before. Yet now they are believed lawful.

So, dont go expecting some free handout if the banks lose their case and that you can still mismage your account in future free of charge.

I think the fairest system would be, assuming banks lose, for the old charges to be recalculated on the current lawful method and refund the difference if there is an over charge.

Smasher

oldwiring wrote: »

As taxpayers, who are bailing out the banks as a result of their irresponsibility, is the OP really suggesting that we give effectively some of that money to others who in many cases have been irresponsible themselves?:rolleyes:

You're comparing people who've tripped up over a few quid (very often a few pence) with an industry who's dishonesty & greed has plunged the global economy into chaos?

dunstonh wrote: »

a lot of people have the mistaken view that bank charges are wrong and unlawful and wont exist after the bank case. That is not correct.

Who are you to make such a statement? Are you judging the case? How about we wait until its over before drawing conclusions.. :rolleyes:

DENMAN_3

dunstonh wrote: »

I think the fairest system would be, assuming banks lose, for the old charges to be recalculated on the current lawful method and refund the difference if there is an over charge.

I dont mind paying a fee to cover expenses occured by another party due to whatever on my behalf.I do however, mind getting shafted by another party who make a profit on such expenses and try to tell me that what they charge is what it costs them:mad:

Nathan_Spleen

oldwiring wrote: »

As taxpayers, who are bailing out the banks as a result of their irresponsibility, is the OP really suggesting that we give effectively some of that money to others who in many cases have been irresponsible themselves?:rolleyes:

Nobody is giving money to anyone. The government has invested in shares in banks - at a knockdown price - and will sell them at a profit when the market recovers as it inevitably will.

The OPs post is the most sensible I've seen in a while. It certainly outranks the tiresome conspiricy theorists who think the government won't 'allow' the banks to have to refund charges because of the economic climate, which is vacuous, ill-researched and based on nothing but imagination.

militantconsumer

DENMAN wrote: »

I dont mind paying a fee to cover expenses occured by another party due to whatever on my behalf.I do however, mind getting shafted by another party who make a profit on such expenses and try to tell me that what they charge is what it costs them:mad:

I think that sums up unfair charges very nicely!