state benefits & £35 bank charge...

Tozer

KrisKross is absolutely right. The particular Act has been totally misconstrued. To a legal mind, it is so obvious.

"Charge" in law means to encumber, mortgage or give as other security. The legislation is saying that it is unlawful to say "Give me £100 now and I will repay you. If I don't you have the right to my benefits".

I really wish people would research the background to this.

krisskross

elaina79 wrote: »

This refers to people who's only income is benefits, not people who maybe getting one benefit ontop of a wage.

Lets say someone who only gets JSA at £60 per week to live on. One charge from the bank and over half of that is gone. For me its not so much the fact that the charge is there it's more the amount they charge. I have read so many times on here about people who only have a few pounds to last until their next benefit is due.
I have been in the same boat and at times not even had a few pence to get milk.
It's not nice when you are sitting in your house without 2 pennies to your name and you hear on the news of these bankers (i lose that word losely) getting huge bonuses.

Even if your only income is benefits it makes absolutely no difference. Charges can be taken from it.

GeoThermal

elaina79 wrote: »

Just found a bit more info that may be of use.

There is an Act of Parliament that Under section 187 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992: apparently, this makes it a criminal offence for banks to take bank charges out of the accounts of people who are entirely dependent on social security benefits.

so if your bank has taken charges out of your Benefits eg:

if you are in receipt of any of the following benefits.
Income Support
Tax Credits
Child Benefit
Job seekers allowance
Incapacity benefit
Disability living allowance
Attendance Allowance
CSA payments
Other DWP payments.

which means:
That the bank can not apply any charges to money received as benefit, and any such charges are unlawful and therefore disallowed.

I quoted this act in an email to my bank, requesting a refund. Here is part of their reply:

"Clydesdale Bank has applied the £25.00 charge to your account in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of your account, and does not refund bank charges under the Social Security Administration Act 1992."

I have asked them which laws exempt them from the act.

Any suggestions for what to do next?

McKneff

billy the fish -
Its not a case of being benefit bashers. I wish more people would take more responsibilities for their own actions. Its always somebody else's fault. And i mean more PEOPLE, not just those on benefits.

And if you read Kim yeovils other posts on other threads you would eat your words.

natweststaffmember

GeoThermal wrote: »

I quoted this act in an email to my bank, requesting a refund. Here is part of their reply:

"Clydesdale Bank has applied the £25.00 charge to your account in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of your account, and does not refund bank charges under the Social Security Administration Act 1992."

I have asked them which laws exempt them from the act.

Any suggestions for what to do next?

Quoting the act is incorrect because the SSAA1992 is about assignment of funds for debt at court not bank charges.

carlos1973

I agree that posters should not judge how others spend their money, regardless of the source of that income. Remember though, opinions are like ****holes, everyone's got one and they all stink!!

On a serious note, I thought the Social Security Admistration Act only covered deductions made to benefits before they are awarded to a claimant. This allows sanctions imposed on JSA, CSA maintainence payments, social fund loans and court awarded attachment of earnings etc to be deducted from a persons benefit prior to paying them.
Once a claimant has recieved their money, deposited into their account by BACS, it is not covered by the SSA Act and as such banks can levy charges upon.

real1314

GeoThermal wrote: »

I quoted this act in an email to my bank, requesting a refund. Here is part of their reply:

"Clydesdale Bank has applied the £25.00 charge to your account in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of your account, and does not refund bank charges under the Social Security Administration Act 1992."

I have asked them which laws exempt them from the act.

Any suggestions for what to do next?

The question isn't "why are they exempt from the act" but instead "why do you think the act applies to a bank account".
Firstly have a look at those sites that claim it does apply - are any of them from benefit related cahrities like shelter or child poverty action group? No. They are sites set up by individuals or self accredited "consumer action" groups. No legal knowledge, no real understanding of the law.
The "right of appropriation" thing can be used, however it still doesn't stop the bank charges - they are completelely differenent.

111222

I went through all this before, it is grey area but the banks win, beacuse they argue that once the money is in your account there is no way to distinguish where it came from in a manner of speakin. I haven't worded that the best but basically they have the right to charge you even though you are on JSA.

GeoThermal

Ah right. I found so many places quoting it as law that I thought it must be true.

carlos1973

Thinking back to many years ago when I had JSA paid into my account I was advised by the JobCentre staff during my inital claim interveiw that I would be responsible for the handling of the account and any charges etc.
The JobCentre staff probably had to do this to cover any misguided approaches due to the SSA Act. I don't know if they still do it though?