Open Letter To David Cameron - 25 AUG REPONSE NOW IN

natweststaffmember

To clarify for a lot of people. Sumpton QC in the HoL appeal stated that bank charges accounted for just 30% of the cost of a current account. That means 70% is generated outside of the charging regime.

Orford

clarelea wrote: »

Why are those of us who are able to properly administrate our accounts paying for people who can't? Due to the inevitably huge payouts the bank are going to be paying out there is now an increasing number of accounts that have a monthly fee and a rapidly decreasing number of free accounts. Banks have will have to recoup their money somehow, and so I fear that the era of free banking will soon be over. As usual it is everyone who will have to pay for the mistakes of a few.

It's an illusion that the 'free in credit' bank account does not involve costs to the banks. The banks do this by charging 20% of their customers fees that are way in excess of their true cost in order to subsidise the cost of running 'free' accounts for the other 80%. In other words, for 25-30 years, your banking has been paid for by the people who can least afford it. You should, at least, show a bit of gratitude instead of moaning that you might have to face up to actually paying something towards the true cost of providing your own banking.

notquitesure_2

And what did Gordon Brown reply when you sent your open letter to him? The man running the country for the last many years. Don't tell us that it's only the Tories that you wish to get at over bank charges. I wanted to use a non political consumer site, not a web GMTV.

natweststaffmember

notquitesure wrote: »

And what did Gordon Brown reply when you sent your open letter to him? The man running the country for the last many years. Don't tell us that it's only the Tories that you wish to get at over bank charges. I wanted to use a non political consumer site, not a web GMTV.

You got a link to where the Labour Government said that charges were unfair?(oh, that must be the OFT(Government) suing the banks on this issue, right?)

Why are we writing to Gordon Brown for?

Brightness

clarelea wrote: »

Why are those of us who are able to properly administrate our accounts paying for people who can't? Due to the inevitably huge payouts the bank are going to be paying out there is now an increasing number of accounts that have a monthly fee and a rapidly decreasing number of free accounts. Banks have will have to recoup their money somehow, and so I fear that the era of free banking will soon be over. As usual it is everyone who will have to pay for the mistakes of a few.
Banks can't take fees from customers account without notice, they are required to send a letter to the customer showing the reason for the charge and when it will be taken. Most banks will reverse the first charge on your account if you have previously had good conduct, so if you do make a mistake (and are actually polite to the person you speak to at the bank) the likelihood is you will get your money back.
I admit that the amount of bank charges are high, but they are supposed to act as a deterant to abusing your account. And finally, lets not forget that these charges were all in the terms and conditions that everyone agreed to when they signed the account opening form!

I find your post extremely insulting to say the least. I have banked with the same bank for over 20 years and know the manager well.

However, 'control' of what happens in his branch is now out of his hands and has gone to a central banking centre.

I check my bank acount almost daily and can account for every penny that goes in and out of it. I also know what days I have money going in and DD's being taken out.

Therefore, it doesn't help matter when this central banking centre decided to take 3 DD's from my account over a week before they were due. The very same day I went to my bank and deposited more than enough money to cover them going out and then spoke to the manager about it.

He apologised profusely but explained that his hands were tied and there was nothing he could do - he was as disgusted about it as I was - especially as it had also incurred some vast charges.

Incidentally, the DD monies never reached their destinations until the due dates so where had they been? Obviously sitting in some bank 'pipeline' somewhere, gathering interest on MY money.

I therefore consider those charges to be MY money and wonder why I should let the bank have the benefit of it.

So, clarelea, before you go casting aspersions and judgements on other people I would suggest you get your facts right. Also, not everyone might be as lucky as you may have been in your life - what about people who have suddenly lost their jobs and then told 'sorry we can't even pay you your wages?'

If you went into a shop and were charged for something you were going to buy next week, you'd want your money back wouldn't you? Well, bank charges are no different in a lot of cases. :mad:

Widelats

clarelea wrote: »

Why are those of us who are able to properly administrate our accounts paying for people who can't? Due to the inevitably huge payouts the bank are going to be paying out there is now an increasing number of accounts that have a monthly fee and a rapidly decreasing number of free accounts. Banks have will have to recoup their money somehow, and so I fear that the era of free banking will soon be over. As usual it is everyone who will have to pay for the mistakes of a few.
Banks can't take fees from customers account without notice, they are required to send a letter to the customer showing the reason for the charge and when it will be taken. Most banks will reverse the first charge on your account if you have previously had good conduct, so if you do make a mistake (and are actually polite to the person you speak to at the bank) the likelihood is you will get your money back.
I admit that the amount of bank charges are high, but they are supposed to act as a deterant to abusing your account. And finally, lets not forget that these charges were all in the terms and conditions that everyone agreed to when they signed the account opening form!

Wow, your either very drunk or have no idea and living as a recluse in a mansion somewhere - charges are taken without consent, plus, they are not deterrants it is a way for banks to make money.

clarelea

I am neither drunk nor a rich recluse. I am a bank cashier who spends a lot of her day dealing with customers who have charges. Whilst I have great sympathy for customers who have genuine reasons for having gone overdrawn or come in to financial difficulty, I'm afraid the majority are repeat offenders who do it every month. What really aggrevates me is that these customers often have large direct debits to Sky or Setanta or similar. If they can't afford to pay for these luxuries then they shouldn't have them.
I realise in my original post I was tarring everyone with the same brush, and I am aware that for some it is an awful position to find yourself in. Can I suggest to those of you whose banks do not inform you of impending charges that you switch to a bank that does, and also has a policy of reversing your first charge as a goodwill gesture.
The point I was intending to get across is that the money that the banks will have to payout will not appear from nowhere. It will either be clawed back via lower credit and higher loan interest, the introduction of new fees on all accounts or it could be written off as bad debt and therefore the government (and therefore the tax payers) will end up footing the bill.

natweststaffmember

clarelea wrote: »

I am neither drunk nor a rich recluse. I am a bank cashier who spends a lot of her day dealing with customers who have charges. Whilst I have great sympathy for customers who have genuine reasons for having gone overdrawn or come in to financial difficulty, I'm afraid the majority are repeat offenders who do it every month. What really aggrevates me is that these customers often have large direct debits to Sky or Setanta or similar. If they can't afford to pay for these luxuries then they shouldn't have them.
I realise in my original post I was tarring everyone with the same brush, and I am aware that for some it is an awful position to find yourself in. Can I suggest to those of you whose banks do not inform you of impending charges that you switch to a bank that does, and also has a policy of reversing your first charge as a goodwill gesture.
The point I was intending to get across is that the money that the banks will have to payout will not appear from nowhere. It will either be clawed back via lower credit and higher loan interest, the introduction of new fees on all accounts or it could be written off as bad debt and therefore the government (and therefore the tax payers) will end up footing the bill.

I did the same job as you for almost 8 years in branches. I refer back to the Banks' QC said in the OFT test case which stated that is was estimated that more then 30% from transaction charges which means that over 50% is not generated from fees.

Can I ask you for your view of the interplay of charges, for example, even if someone has a "luxury" do you think or can you remember examples in which the Direct debit itself has generated another charge and if that crosses over a charging period then it has generated potentially £100 on maybe a £10 Direct Debit.
I saw this as being the biggest issue, the interplay of charges on someone's ability to pay.

clarelea

Yes, of course and I do think that that is wrong, and it is very difficult to try and explain those policies to the customer. However, it is not just the extra charges which will be refunded, it will be all of them. This is why, if a bank has a policy in which it reverses the first charge on an account, it should act as a warning to the account holder, but time after time I see people getting charges they could have easily avoided and now they will get their money back.

Widelats

clarelea wrote: »

I realise in my original post I was tarring everyone with the same brush, and I am aware that for some it is an awful position to find yourself in. Can I suggest to those of you whose banks do not inform you of impending charges that you switch to a bank that does, and also has a policy of reversing your first charge as a goodwill gesture.
The point I was intending to get across is that the money that the banks will have to payout will not appear from nowhere. It will either be clawed back via lower credit and higher loan interest, the introduction of new fees on all accounts or it could be written off as bad debt and therefore the government (and therefore the tax payers) will end up footing the bill.

I do know what you mean, i am one of these who has no setanta or other direct debits yet i got charged for paypal errors 4 times, money was taken without my consent which leads me to as you what bank gives notice that they are going to take money? I would join this bank.