£30 for £1.09 o/d!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Supermarshal

Starsinmycrown, I'm having similar problems with Lloyds myself and my advise don't waste any time, get a letter in straight away to claim your money back, given that you are unemployed use the financial hardship one, and don't take any crap from them and above all don't let them lie to you, they told me that even though it was their charge that took me overdrawn in January they would be charging me again as I am supposed to have made myself overdrawn by incurring the charge, however I found out recently that they are not allowed to make another charge if the overdraft is the result of a charge. Nail them to the wall.

natweststaffmember

Supermarshal wrote: »

Starsinmycrown, I'm having similar problems with Lloyds myself and my advise don't waste any time, get a letter in straight away to claim your money back, given that you are unemployed use the financial hardship one, and don't take any crap from them and above all don't let them lie to you, they told me that even though it was their charge that took me overdrawn in January they would be charging me again as I am supposed to have made myself overdrawn by incurring the charge, however I found out recently that they are not allowed to make another charge if the overdraft is the result of a charge. Nail them to the wall.

Where have you found this as I have been in the Bank Charges Campaign almost 3 years and I haven't found that out(I have an eye for that sort of detail so am very interested now).

JaRocks28

As far as I was aware - They could charge another charge, if the original charge takes the account holder over any agreed overdraft facilities. However it is just another charge you can claim back and put in writing..

willo65

swstevewil wrote: »

OP has no choice other than to sign contract. sure he could check other banks but they all charge pretty much the same. If he wants his JSA then he needs bank account. He may have also been in different financial circumstances then.

OFT thinks levels of bank charges and terms and conditions are unfair,
judges agree.

Why do people like Simon Templar think they know better.

banks have a reason for denying the glaringly obvious.

Have yet to see a response that validates the argument that the level of bank charges are fair.
Could any of the people with judgemental responses please present an argument that we, the OFT and judges presiding over test case can accept as a viable reason for high level of bank charges.

I think that the Charge for parking in my local carpark is unfair (only one in town)so I don't park there.......If I don't like bank charges I keep an eye on my account and don't get any. I don't understand your point.

swstevewil

willo65 wrote: »

I think that the Charge for parking in my local carpark is unfair (only one in town)so I don't park there.......If I don't like bank charges I keep an eye on my account and don't get any. I don't understand your point.

I am sure you dont.

There has been enough evidence presented before you.
Any further attempts to explain the fact that the LEVEL OF BANK CHARGES is unfair will not make it any clearer to you.

The banks with the funds to employ legal minds of the highest calibre have not as yet been able to prove otherwise. I wonder if they would get any further with your car park analogy.

You still havent provided a valid argument for the level of charges.

willo65

Do they really have to justify it? does Tesco justify the price of its beans? Do car parks justify their fees? Do estate agents justify their fees? Then why should the banks??

swstevewil

Tesco would have to justify the price of a tin of beans if it was £35, :eek:
they wouldnt be allowed to not give you the beans if you only had £30 in your pocket and then tell you owe them another £35 because of this and this will be added to your next bill.

I could go through the rest but it still would not make a difference to you would it.

Could you please please please respond with an argument that says the level of Bank charges are fair. preferably one that the banks could use themselves

Jimjams00_2

Although my brother does not have his benefit paid into his bank account, he was charged £30 for being 9p overdrawn. Having to pay that amount of money back when you are on benefits is not easy.

KimYeovil

starsinmycrown wrote: »

What I don't understand about people on this forum- yes, you- is that the whole ethos of the forum is "moneysaving" and "consumer revenge" What Martin is about, is standing up to these people, and I don't think that I'm in the wrong place here expecting people to be supportive and offer suggestions.

So you think the original poster would rather pay his bank £12 or £20 every single month? In what way is that 'moneysaving' or 'consumer revenge'? Pay £30 once in a blue moon when you've been careless or pay £12 each and every month to have a bank account. Weird.

Bank charges may be an unfair tax on the greedy, foolish and juvenile. But why on earth are people on benefits complaining? In what way will no longer receiving 'free' banking be beneficial to them?

KimYeovil

swstevewil wrote: »

Could you please please please respond with an argument that says the level of Bank charges are fair. preferably one that the banks could use themselves

Paying £0 per year year after year strikes me as more advantageous to those on benefits and those who are poor than asking them to pay £180 bank charges each and every year.

Of course, that does not mean the way the charges are distributed is fair - but it does mean the op is a turkey voting for Christmas.