what is a "fair" unpaid Direct Debit charge?

Sol00

willo65 wrote: »

I find it quite disturbing that people are allowed bank accounts if they can't do basic math and workout how much money they have to spend and how much they don't.

Again you're generalising everyone under the same umbrella. I hope you don't work for my bank, as it's quite worrying that their staff are trained to think of their customers in this way.

willo65

iscrimger wrote: »

I believe they should charge us for unpaid Direct Debits but not as much as they do.

They should allow the transaction to go ahead then charge a percentage of the amount from say a minimum of £5 to a maximum of £30.

I personally wouldn't mind paying so long as the transaction went through.

My own personal example is that last year on several occasions a DD for £10.81 was declined as it was coming out the day before my salary. I was then charged £30 for a failed direct debit & then £20 for going over my authorized overdraft - which was the whole reason the original DD was refused! £50 in charges for a DD worth £10! Ridiculous!

At least someone is focused on the original post. Be careful of what you say they all seem to jump on you for having an opinion.

willo65

natweststaffmember wrote: »

Willo65, getting away from your job. You deal with customer's every day. Do you believe that it was the intention of the individual to deliberately exceed their overdraft?
You can see the consequences of that action, and you can see that only in about 0.000000001% of cases is there a deliberate attempt to spend money that an individual doesn't have. Do you believe the resultant charges that are levied even for, shall we say, a £2-£5 miscalculation, of maybe £50-£60 is fair?
I didn't when I worked in the bank. I understood how people miscalculated or got themselves into that situation, for example, assuming the card wouldn't work if it was declined yet not understanding floor limits. Even if I do understand that and even if the overdraft has been exceeded, the level to which the charge has been administered worsens the situation. For example, £50 loss(charges), charges by the Direct debit provider for late payment, and the bill still isn;t paid.
I'm on JSA which means that I get £128 every 2 weeks. If I am in that scenario, then I have so far lost almost half my weekly allowance to live on(I still haven't paid that bill either). Is that fair?

I don't think I am in a position to say if the charges are fair but as I said before i believe it would be fairer to charge say £8/£10/£12 I do think this would be fair and was just saying in earlier postings I didn't see a problem in some profit being bade through charges.

willo65

Nathan_Spleen wrote: »

For fear of being accused of selective reading, how can you use a chip & pin machine if it's down?

Please think before you post.

It may be offline but a transaction can still be processed on the machine to be completed at a later time.

willo65

Nathan_Spleen wrote: »

For someone who is unable to even spell 'guarantee', I doubt whether your limited knowledge extends to understanding the meaning of it.

Who guarantees the cheque? The customer you say?

http://www.apacs.org.uk/payment_options/plastic_cards_7.html

So just so you understand what i am trying to say the bank is not at the store to guarantee payment of a cheque so you have a piece of plastic that says it will guarantee payment upto the amount stated. If you issue a cheque using the card for funds you don't have then it is theft. If you have a balance of £0 with no overdraft limit and a cheque book containing 20 cheques then you gurantee every cheque for £250 then i'm pretty sure that the £5000 you spent would be classed as theft.

natweststaffmember

willo65 wrote: »

http://www.apacs.org.uk/payment_options/plastic_cards_7.html

So just so you understand what i am trying to say the bank is not at the store to guarantee payment of a cheque so you have a piece of plastic that says it will guarantee payment upto the amount stated. If you issue a cheque using the card for funds you don't have then it is theft. If you have a balance of £0 with no overdraft limit and a cheque book containing 20 cheques then you gurantee every cheque for £250 then i'm pretty sure that the £5000 you spent would be classed as theft.

Willo,


"The Rules of the UK Domestic Cheque Guarantee Card Scheme state that a card issuer
guarantees in any single transaction the payment of only one cheque taken from only
one of its own cheque books for up to £50, or for up to £100 or £250 if indicated in the
hologram provided the cheque is not drawn on the account of a Limited Company, and
i) The cheque bears the same customer name and, where printed, bank sort code,
as the card.
ii) The cheque is dated with the actual date of issue.
iii) It is signed, before the expiry of the card, in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Gibraltar or on the premises of any
United Kingdom Customs post located outside these territories in the presence of the
payee by the account holder.
iv) The card number is recorded on the reverse of the cheque by the payee
(this requirement can only be varied by specific prior agreement of the Scheme’s
governing body).
v) The card has not been altered or defaced.
vi) Where the guarantee is used to support an encashment service, then the following
rules will apply:
a) The number of guaranteed cheque encashments, when made with the support
of a cheque card, is limited to one cheque per customer per day.
b) Special “frequency marking” pages are provided at the back of cheque books,
and the appropriate day square is effectively cancelled by cashiers whenever
cheque cards are used to support encashments.
c) The cheque is delivered to the bank of the encashment service provider for
collection no later than 3 days after the date upon which the cheque is received
by the encashment service provider (for these purposes weekend days and Bank
Holidays shall not be included in the day count, nor the day upon which the
cheque is received by the encashment service provider)."

The PDF to the right of the article does invalidate what you have stated around guaranteeing the cheques. I have highlighted the relevant bit.

Sol00

willo65 wrote: »

At least someone is focused on the original post. Be careful of what you say they all seem to jump on you for having an opinion.

Not at all, but if you're going to put your point across you should acknowledge and answer other people's.

Your point, from what I can see, is that Tesco makes a profit from selling a tin of beans, the answer to that was this is a product they are selling. Your response - nothing.

Are the banks planning on selling charges to their customers in a big red bow all of a sudden?

natweststaffmember

Sol00 wrote: »

Not at all, but if you're going to put your point across you should acknowledge and answer other people's.

Your point, from what I can see, is that Tesco makes a profit from selling a tin of beans, the answer to that was this is a product they are selling. Your response - nothing.

Are the banks planning on selling charges to their customers in a big red bow all of a sudden?

ROFLMAO, that did make me laugh

Orford

willo65 wrote: »

If you have a balance of £0 with no overdraft limit and a cheque book containing 20 cheques then you gurantee every cheque for £250 then i'm pretty sure that the £5000 you spent would be classed as theft.

To your knowledge, how many times has that happened? This just gets more and more surreal.

Nathan_Spleen

Groan.

Do you get dizzy backtracking on what you've said?

You told me that it is the customer who guarentees the cheque. It is not. It is the bank who guarentees payment to the retailer and in doing so authorises the transaction and in turn rubishes your theory that it is possible to go overdrawn without the banks permission.

I'd also be grateful if you would point me to where, in the APACS link you posted, that using a cheque in this manner without sufficient funds amounts to theft.

As so far all we've got to go on is your twisted imagine. Opinions are fine but they are worthless if they don't have at least some factual basis. If you seriously believe this is theft then surely you can google up something to substantiate it. If not I would ask you stop posting blatent lies.