What would be a fair amout to charge?

melorablack

AverageJoe wrote: »

But their terms are fine, but I stand by my point of saying if you open an account with no OD facility, they should not honour payments that go beyond it - its their choice and they trap you.. this is why there is a case in the courts and this is why ppl are getting refunded...

same fo CC limits - they set a limit but with the interest and time scales, if you are close to your limit you are not going to know at any given point what the balance is EXACTLY to the penny - they give you a limit, then allow you to unwittingly break it so they can justify £35 charge for nothing more than a rule break.

But a few years ago when things were really hard for my mum if there was no money in her account the dd would not go through (and yes she would be charged). Does this not happen anymore? Anyway if you break the rules in anything whether it is a sport, the law or a bank account you will be fined or punished.

Reminds me of a comedy sketch I saw recently: "I set the building on fire yes. But I did it and they BLAMED me for it!"

arunadasi

AverageJoe wrote: »

But their terms are fine, but I stand by my point of saying if you open an account with no OD facility, they should not honour payments that go beyond it - its their choice and they trap you.. this is why there is a case in the courts and this is why ppl are getting refunded...
k.

Exactly. And you pay a charge to the issuers of the DD. That is far more fair.
If I try to take out money from an ATM and there is no money, I don't get it, end of.

chopperharris

Right so let me get this straight.

If I overspend .... its not my fault and dont have to pay for it?

DOH.I get it its the banks fault I spend more than I earn and dont leave enough to honour my payments.....so why should I be fined for them paying for my mistake.

Bloody lovechildren , I knew it wasnt me.

They owe me 1x30 quid over the last 30 years , where do i sign.:mad:

arunadasi

No. We should not overspend. If the banks simply do not pay the DD we have not overspent.

natweststaffmember

chopperharris wrote: »

Right so let me get this straight.

If I overspend .... its not my fault and dont have to pay for it? No one is arguing the bank cannot make a charge for returning an item unpaid. If they are arguing no charge for that one then it is madness.

DOH.I get it its the banks fault I spend more than I earn and dont leave enough to honour my payments.....so why should I be fined for them paying for my mistake.

Bloody lovechildren , I knew it wasnt me.

They owe me 1x30 quid over the last 30 years , where do i sign.:mad:

This argument that banks cannot charge you for having items unpaid is ridiculous, but it is the fairness of the charge. For example, if you have a £2 DD and no funds then you are charged £30+ so it is unfair on that basis. If it was say £3 for returning an item, not sure many would complain about that. And for going into an excess overdraft, what does it actually cost the bank?? Interest, so why not welly up the interest substantially as a deterrant. If someone pays with their card and it continues to exceed their overdraft, then take the card away. That sort of thing. Banks should charge something that is fair not the current situation of charging £50+ for maybe one item, as it can come out to. Fair banking not unfair banking.

elaina79

Well it can only cost them a few pounds at the most to process either in unpaid DD or going overdrawn. Much less than the £35 they currently charge.

adolphin1

Surely that is what the test case is all about! I am sure they will sort it for all of us, fairly. Do you work for a bank Melorablack?

melorablack

adolphin1 wrote: »

Surely that is what the test case is all about! I am sure they will sort it for all of us, fairly. Do you work for a bank Melorablack?

No but my sister does so I hear a lot from her, she doesn't work with bank charges and never has so she doesn't know all the ins and outs and she isn't in a customer facing job either so my questions were purely because I'm interested in what other people think. It seems to me that a lot of people don't want to take responsibilty for their money, they want the bank to do it all for them and not let a payment go if the funds aren't there.

dunstonh

melorablack wrote: »

Just out of interest, I have been reading the threads on this board and I'm just wondering what would people think would be a reasonable charge from the banks when you try and use money you don't have in the bank.

I think we should perhaps move to the more continental european system and consider it theft. We wouldnt have this mess if we had the same attitude as say the French.

If you are talking about bounced items then the credit card review by the OFT considered upto £12 was fair. So, its probably a good "guess" to think that they will find something similar is right for current accounts.

adolphin1

On the contrary, people are taking responsibility for their money. That is what this is all about.
What do you think is the cost of a standard letter?