What would be a fair amout to charge?

Doshamento

simon_templar wrote: »

How long before someone complains i got charged £2 for being 1p overdrawn?

If I had been lacksidasical - then £2....I could live with.

£12 and the likes of more........NOT ACCEPTABLE!

Hulahoops

A few months ago due to unexpected outgoings I was budgeting to the penny on my account to ensure outgoings were covered. Completely my fault and I understand this I missed reading a letter about my buildings insurance which was going up by £1.20 for future payments. Now I understand that in a perfect world I would have plenty of money in my account however that month wasn't the case. So Natwest bounced my dd for approx 80p and charged me £38 for that. However because they can add £38 automatically to my account (but not 80p) I also got charged at the end of the month £25 for unauthorised overdraft charges. I do try and live within my means but you cannot tell me that £63 is a fair charge for an automated letter

Doshamento

Hulahoops wrote: »

A few months ago due to unexpected outgoings I was budgeting to the penny on my account to ensure outgoings were covered. Completely my fault and I understand this I missed reading a letter about my buildings insurance which was going up by £1.20 for future payments. Now I understand that in a perfect world I would have plenty of money in my account however that month wasn't the case. So Natwest bounced my dd for approx 80p and charged me £38 for that. However because they can add £38 automatically to my account (but not 80p) I also got charged at the end of the month £25 for unauthorised overdraft charges. I do try and live within my means but you cannot tell me that £63 is a fair charge for an automated letter

No it is not fair.

Unfair Charges...then charges CHARGED on these charges...and on and on......:rotfl:

Hulahoops

lol - I know, now I coped with these charges (did try a call to customer services but just got told off for going over my overdraft and couldn't be bothered to argue) but can you imagine what its like for people who can't absorb the cost - even for me thats the equivalent of a couple of weeks food shopping. This is not to say that after the ruling if it goes in my favour I won't be trying to reclaim....

Doshamento

Hulahoops wrote: »

lol - I know, now I coped with these charges (did try a call to customer services but just got told off for going over my overdraft and couldn't be bothered to argue) but can you imagine what its like for people who can't absorb the cost - even for me thats the equivalent of a couple of weeks food shopping. This is not to say that after the ruling if it goes in my favour I won't be trying to reclaim....

Yes. I can imagine and £38 is quite a lot of shopping in Lidl or Aldi etc

However, this is an horrendous amount.

Halifax use to charge that amount. I didn't know that NatWest did too for a returned DD?

In either case this charge amount needs to be justified, and then amended accordingly to a reasonable amount.

dunstonh

£25 made more sense when a quarter of the branch staff were involved in dealing with bad accounts and bounced items. The manpower involved justified it back then. Nowadays there isnt the same level of manpower. Although the computers used to reduce the manpower cost money as did programing them in the first place. So, £12 does sound more reasonable.

tonib85

melorablack wrote: »

But these charges are in the agreement you sign when you open the bank account. It seems that its ok as long as it suits you but once you have to pay for something then its the banks fault. They do tell you you will be charged this much if this happens when you open the account.

I do agree with this but in the space of 2 1/2 years my bank took £1632 in charges. Half of these charges i don't even know what they was for. Last week they took £98 charges, my full weeks money (being on benefits) and a little bit more. I went to natwest to argue the fact of when i made transations with my card the money was in the account until THEY took out charges and then i got charged for that as well. It just annoys me because this is not the first time this has happened and when you try to talk to someone on the phone all they say is that it was MY fault. Once when i trying to disscuss the fact that they've took all my benefits all i got from the person on the other end is that i "go out and get a job then i might not be in debt all the time". With HELP like this no wonder people want they're well earned money back. I later found out that banks cannot take all of someones benefits (from my solictor) but when i told them this they denied it all. I have wrote to the bank in the hopes to claim all my charges back.

tonib85

Doshamento wrote: »

Yes. I can imagine and £38 is quite a lot of shopping in Lidl or Aldi etc

However, this is an horrendous amount.

Halifax use to charge that amount. I didn't know that NatWest did too for a returned DD?

In either case this charge amount needs to be justified, and then amended accordingly to a reasonable amount.

Natwest charged me £30 and £30 again for a dd that was 3p over what was in my account once they took that i was charged another £28 for going overdrawn and £30 on top of that for something that they couldnt explain and in between this i used my card at a co op for food shopping 2 sperate days and because they took there charges the day after the last one apprantly the money money wasn't in the account when i paid for my shopping (which it was) i was charged another £38 twice. For a single mom which i only get £96 a week is it fair charges for the space of only 6 days i was charged £194 for in the end 3p

nickmack

dunstonh wrote: »

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.

There's a subtle difference in what the OFT actually said, which was:

'we have decided to include in the statement a simple monetary threshold for intervention by OFT on default charges. The threshold is £12. Our presumption will be that credit card default charges set above this level are unfair unless there are exceptional factors......and a court will certainly not consider that a default fee is fair just because it is below the threshold.'

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/financial_products/oft842.pdf

This is why (most of) the Credit Card companies set their charges at £12, because it's the most they can charge without the OFT challenging them.

In reality, I believe the threshold should have been set lower than this for Credit Cards. Also, banks could claim current account charges cost more than Credit Card charges and they would probably be right.

However, for current accounts, I would be in favour of a small nominal overhead charge and then perhaps a percentage charge of the exceeded amount.

jon_boy75

As many people have suggested, it's about fairness and not being excessive. People make mistakes, sometimes people push the boundaries when it comes to their personal banking. However, if the banks will permit people to go overdrawn, then they need to control it as best they can, and fairly.

Apparently a recent study showed it cost about £1.50 - 2.50 in admin to the bank, for a person going overdrawn.

Let's not forget, when the banks have made 'mistakes' recently, what was the charge levied on them? Accountability and fairness didnt really count for them did it.

I get slightly annoyed when people say that the Terms and Conditions are clear etc etc. These dont take into account real life, nor do they give us any choice. If we didnt have a bank account with at least 1 bank we wouldnt be able to get paid...so we have to have a bank account, and they know it.

The snowballing charges are a disgrace and they should be corrected. It's very easy for people to say that it's the customers fault, and sometimes it is...but they should be charged accordingly.

Given the current situation, haven't many of the banks damaged the economy to a huge extent, making the dream of house buying almost impossible for many thousands of people. What would be a fair amount to charge for that? For greed and short-termism? For bundlign up bad debt and selling it on? Who is the more guilty party?

More questions than answers!!