We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Answering bank charges skeptics: pls help....
MSE_Martin
Posts: 8,272 Money Saving Expert
IM PLANNING A GUIDE TO ANSWER COMMON SCEPTICAL QUESTIONS ABOUT BANK CHARGES. MY VERY ROUGH UNPROOFED INITIAL THOUGHTS ARE BELOW.
WHETHER YOUR PRO OR ANTI-BANK CHARGES YOUR THOUGHTS ON WHAT Q or As ARE MISSING WOULD BE REALLY HELP (AND AGAIN ITS VERY ROUGH SO PLEASE FORGIVE ANY GLARING ERRORS OR STRANGE PHRASES).
THIS ISNT ABOUT DEBATING THE ANSWERS (THATLL COME LATER) MORE ABOUT IF IVE MISSED ANY QUESTIONS>
THANKS...
MARTIN
The final stages in the history of the great bank charges reclaiming campaign are about to be written.
Yet many misconceptions about its impact still fly around, “will it mean the end of free banking?”, “haven’t people just stolen money from the banks?”
Having debated and argued many of these since I first got involved in the campaign back in January 2006, its time to collate them, here’s my commonly asked Bank Charges Q&A
Q. “Where are we in the bank charges process?”
A. The high court and court have appeal have said fairness laws do apply to bank charges, the banks are currently appealing that in the House of Lords. A result is expected in mid-October.Assuming the Lords upholds that decision, the next stage is for the Office of Fair Trading to decide whether it thinks the charges actually are unfair. It has provisionally said it does.
Yet the bank could then launch a legal challenge to the OFT’s decision, which could see the whole court process restarted. Sadly, it wouldn’t be too good an idea to bet against this as the banks have already shown a strong tendancy to try and drag this out.
Q. “Wouldn’t a bank charges payout be a nightmare for the economy, after all many big banks are now publically owned?”
A. Actually it’s arguable there’s nothing the economy needs more than the stimulus of a bank charges payout.
Currently the Bank of England is trying to push money out into the economy through something called “quantative easing” – in other words printing money – and each time it does it we’re talking £50bn plus – far bigger than the amount that’d need paying out on bank charges (possibly around £10bn even if we had automatic payback).
The main place that cash goes is to the banks, and the hope is they’ll lend it out so the economy flows. Yet they’re keeping hold of it, to buff up their balance sheets and ensure they meet the imposed capital restrictions.
So what better way to get the money out there, and immediately stimulate the economy than putting this money back into real people’s hands.
Q. “Will everyone get all their money back?”
A. Assuming the Banks legal challenges are all turned down, it should open to the doors to people getting their money back. Yet exactly how is still unclear – as the legal cases themselves are about the fairness of charges, not about reclaiming itself.
The worst case scenario is people will need to take individual small claims cases again against the banks, as happened in the early days. Though it is hoped at the very least a more straightforward system of claiming would be set up, perhaps through the financial Ombudsman.
That’s the reason this site has been lobbying politicians to make sure there’s a fair and appropriate system of payout once the entire thing is sorted out – include lobbying for an automatic payback of every charge (see replies from {David Cameron} and {Nick Clegg}).
Q. “Is it still worth claiming?”
A. The hold imposed by the regulator, the FSA, on banks needing to deal with reclaiming cases, still stands. There are currently over a million people said to be in the queue to reclaim charges – and they will all need processing once everything works through and the hold is lifted.
Therefore the sooner people get their claim in (free templates in the {bank charges} guide) the better. Most important to note is that the hold on reclaiming for anyone suffering financial hardship does not apply and you can reclaim right ow (see the {bank charges financial hardship} guide.
Q. “Why should people who’ve abused their bank accounts get this money back leaving those who’ve behaved rightly to pay for it?”
A. While of course I understand the argument, for me it’s the banks who’ve abused accounts through a systemic, unlawful abuse of customers who go beyond their limits.
For years its been the people having bank charges have been subsidizing the banks. It’s estimated banks have made over £3 billion a year from bank charges, a pure profit based system.
Regardless of the fact that financial justice alone means we shouldn’t allow banks to get away with their system unlawful behavior – actually its very unlikely the loss of profit from the banks will filter to those who manage their accounts well.
We have a hugely competitive bank account market place. Many banks will regularly pay £100 sign up bonuses, give 0% overdrafts, 6% interest in credit to try and sign up lucrative new customers (see {best bank accounts} guide). This isn’t likely to end.
The current account is the building block of finance; it’s more than a mere product, as the data gathered is used to cross-sell us many other products. Any bank who introduces a fee will haemorrhage customers, and others will lap up the commercial opportunities and suck in their customers with fees-free accounts.
Q. Hasn’t bank charge reclaiming hit the national fibre, leading to a compensation culture?
A. Actually my view is the opposite. No single issue has better educated consumers, a bank’s job is to make money, simple as that. It’s there to flog you things. Yet for years too many people have believed their bank’s their friend.
The bank charges campaign has opened the door to a new well-placed scepticism; it means that people finally realise the bank isn’t on their side and isn’t always right; it can be beaten, and we should be cheering such a great move forward. Without it PPI misselling and Mortgage Exit Fee reclaiming wouldn’t have been so vast.
There’s a big difference between reclaiming and compensation. Reclaiming is about getting back money that was wrongfully taken from you – not about trying to assign blame when something happens to you – for me reclaiming is pure financial justice.
Q. “Will this mean the end of free banking?”
A. This question has been running on ever since reclaiming first started (see my blogs from 2007 & 2008 on it “don’t blame reclaimers” and “it’s not the end of free banking”.)
Yet I’ve never taken this stance. Here’s the reasons why I still don’t think bank charges reclaiming will kill ‘free banking’.
It always makes me laugh that articles often refer back to the April 06 OFT opinion that effectively reduced credit card charges and say “lots of new credit card charges have been introduced because of the OFT case”.
Many credit card charges were launched because the bank found another way to bamboozle customers into giving it more money. Do you really think once they thought of this, they wouldn’t have introduced te charges anyway?
Bank charges reclaiming has been around three years now. Over £1 billion is thought to have been paid out, and the banks have at the same time (though not caused by it) collapsed, yet STILL we haven’t seen the end of ‘free banking’.
Jon Snow, as part of a Channel 4 news interview on bank charges, way in 2007/8 said he bet banks would start introducing charges for cash machine withdrawals – we still haven’t seen it.
Q. “People knew about these charges, its their own fault?”
A. These charges are unlawful, and hopefully the courts will soon back that up. The fact people knew about them doesn’t change their illegality.
If I walked up to someone in the street, told them I was going to punch them, then punched them – the fact I’d prewarned doesn’t make my actions any more legal.
Banks have been unlawfully taking money, and they’ve been doing it without asking. Remember if British Gas thinks you owe it money it needs take you to court to do so. If a bank wants your money, it just takes it – one reason they’ve avoided court decisions for so long – they’ve been able to create their own ‘justice’.
Worse while there is competition in the bank account market as a whole, there’s never been competition in the bank charges sector - if you don’t like the charges there’s no way to avoid it – all banks levy the same charges.
Over the last few years more and more companies have pushed, discounted and cajoled us into paying by Direct Debit. If you don’t you pay more; or in some cases can’t even get a deal. When you factor that it in to the ‘manage your money argument’. It gets very difficult; with automated payouts if you dont have the money, it disappears anyway. Direct Debit bouncing is a big trigger for many bank charges.
Q. “These people deserve what they get, they’re stealing the banks money?”
A. This one’s a complete myth, banks invented bank charges to make money, they’re not being ‘stolen from’.
In days of yore, if you attempted to pay a Direct Debit or cheque with insufficient money in your account it simply wasn’t paid out. Then, probably because some bright banking spark decided that more money could be made if they did pay out, things were changed.
Now, the real system is hidden, but it works like this:
· Authorised overdraft e.g. up to £500
· Unauthorised paid limit e.g. up to £1,000 your money will still be paid but you'll be given a bank charge
· Unauthorised unpaid limit e.g. beyond £1,000 here no payment will be made.
You have to admire the profiteering genius of this system. Instead of not paying, the banks created a system where they would pay out, but would charge £35 a pop for every transaction – no matter how small – beyond that limit. It’s no wonder they now make from £1.6bn to £3bn a year from this.
In the past once you couldn’t pay out you’d know as the payment wouldn’t go through. Yet this new system meant many many more penalty charges could be levied as people paid for things on cards in stores, and all went through fine without realising there’d be a £35 charge every time.
If banks didn’t want people to take the cash, they simply wouldn’t pay it out.
Q. Actual question sent to my NOTW column... “Why don’t you advise these scrotes to keep a more watchful eye on their own finances so they don't go overdrawn in the first place. It ain't rocket science: if you can't afford it, don't spend it?“
A. In one way the questions right, as I always explain, the best way to beat charges is avoidance. Keep track of what’s in your account, do a budget, and manage your money carefully.
Yet in the main the questions a disgusting slur on the millions who’ve had charges. I got involved in the campaign to reclaim bank charges after meeting a single mum, a carer for her autistic son. She NEVER overspent, but a benefits office glitch meant it paid out late, so five direct debits bounced, meaning nearly £200 of charges.
Of course she couldn’t pay. I met her a year later when charges on the charges meant she owed £3,000. A good swathe of the UK are victims of this malicious financial injustice: charges are designed to penalise and entrap.
WHETHER YOUR PRO OR ANTI-BANK CHARGES YOUR THOUGHTS ON WHAT Q or As ARE MISSING WOULD BE REALLY HELP (AND AGAIN ITS VERY ROUGH SO PLEASE FORGIVE ANY GLARING ERRORS OR STRANGE PHRASES).
THIS ISNT ABOUT DEBATING THE ANSWERS (THATLL COME LATER) MORE ABOUT IF IVE MISSED ANY QUESTIONS>
THANKS...
MARTIN
The final stages in the history of the great bank charges reclaiming campaign are about to be written.
Yet many misconceptions about its impact still fly around, “will it mean the end of free banking?”, “haven’t people just stolen money from the banks?”
Having debated and argued many of these since I first got involved in the campaign back in January 2006, its time to collate them, here’s my commonly asked Bank Charges Q&A
Q. “Where are we in the bank charges process?”
A. The high court and court have appeal have said fairness laws do apply to bank charges, the banks are currently appealing that in the House of Lords. A result is expected in mid-October.Assuming the Lords upholds that decision, the next stage is for the Office of Fair Trading to decide whether it thinks the charges actually are unfair. It has provisionally said it does.
Yet the bank could then launch a legal challenge to the OFT’s decision, which could see the whole court process restarted. Sadly, it wouldn’t be too good an idea to bet against this as the banks have already shown a strong tendancy to try and drag this out.
Q. “Wouldn’t a bank charges payout be a nightmare for the economy, after all many big banks are now publically owned?”
A. Actually it’s arguable there’s nothing the economy needs more than the stimulus of a bank charges payout.
Currently the Bank of England is trying to push money out into the economy through something called “quantative easing” – in other words printing money – and each time it does it we’re talking £50bn plus – far bigger than the amount that’d need paying out on bank charges (possibly around £10bn even if we had automatic payback).
The main place that cash goes is to the banks, and the hope is they’ll lend it out so the economy flows. Yet they’re keeping hold of it, to buff up their balance sheets and ensure they meet the imposed capital restrictions.
So what better way to get the money out there, and immediately stimulate the economy than putting this money back into real people’s hands.
Q. “Will everyone get all their money back?”
A. Assuming the Banks legal challenges are all turned down, it should open to the doors to people getting their money back. Yet exactly how is still unclear – as the legal cases themselves are about the fairness of charges, not about reclaiming itself.
The worst case scenario is people will need to take individual small claims cases again against the banks, as happened in the early days. Though it is hoped at the very least a more straightforward system of claiming would be set up, perhaps through the financial Ombudsman.
That’s the reason this site has been lobbying politicians to make sure there’s a fair and appropriate system of payout once the entire thing is sorted out – include lobbying for an automatic payback of every charge (see replies from {David Cameron} and {Nick Clegg}).
Q. “Is it still worth claiming?”
A. The hold imposed by the regulator, the FSA, on banks needing to deal with reclaiming cases, still stands. There are currently over a million people said to be in the queue to reclaim charges – and they will all need processing once everything works through and the hold is lifted.
Therefore the sooner people get their claim in (free templates in the {bank charges} guide) the better. Most important to note is that the hold on reclaiming for anyone suffering financial hardship does not apply and you can reclaim right ow (see the {bank charges financial hardship} guide.
Q. “Why should people who’ve abused their bank accounts get this money back leaving those who’ve behaved rightly to pay for it?”
A. While of course I understand the argument, for me it’s the banks who’ve abused accounts through a systemic, unlawful abuse of customers who go beyond their limits.
For years its been the people having bank charges have been subsidizing the banks. It’s estimated banks have made over £3 billion a year from bank charges, a pure profit based system.
Regardless of the fact that financial justice alone means we shouldn’t allow banks to get away with their system unlawful behavior – actually its very unlikely the loss of profit from the banks will filter to those who manage their accounts well.
We have a hugely competitive bank account market place. Many banks will regularly pay £100 sign up bonuses, give 0% overdrafts, 6% interest in credit to try and sign up lucrative new customers (see {best bank accounts} guide). This isn’t likely to end.
The current account is the building block of finance; it’s more than a mere product, as the data gathered is used to cross-sell us many other products. Any bank who introduces a fee will haemorrhage customers, and others will lap up the commercial opportunities and suck in their customers with fees-free accounts.
Q. Hasn’t bank charge reclaiming hit the national fibre, leading to a compensation culture?
A. Actually my view is the opposite. No single issue has better educated consumers, a bank’s job is to make money, simple as that. It’s there to flog you things. Yet for years too many people have believed their bank’s their friend.
The bank charges campaign has opened the door to a new well-placed scepticism; it means that people finally realise the bank isn’t on their side and isn’t always right; it can be beaten, and we should be cheering such a great move forward. Without it PPI misselling and Mortgage Exit Fee reclaiming wouldn’t have been so vast.
There’s a big difference between reclaiming and compensation. Reclaiming is about getting back money that was wrongfully taken from you – not about trying to assign blame when something happens to you – for me reclaiming is pure financial justice.
Q. “Will this mean the end of free banking?”
A. This question has been running on ever since reclaiming first started (see my blogs from 2007 & 2008 on it “don’t blame reclaimers” and “it’s not the end of free banking”.)
Yet I’ve never taken this stance. Here’s the reasons why I still don’t think bank charges reclaiming will kill ‘free banking’.
- Free banking doesn’t exist so how can it end?
- It’s mismanagement, not bank charges that’ve really hurt.
Even if £3bn is paid out, repaying every bank charge for years, this is a fraction of the taxpayer’s bill for bailing out banks. If anything sees off ‘free banking’, it’ll be SHAMBOLIC management decisions that cost hundreds of billions of pounds (much to the taxpayer) and caused record losses. In context, bank charges reclaiming is small change. - The market is too competitive.
As explained above, for those who’ve managed their accounts within their limits (always the best way) the market place is generally still amazingly competitive.
- Banks always add charges.
Banks are always adding stealth charges to everything; both before, since and I’m sure, after bank charges.
Whether it’s additional loads for foreign exchange spending, paying to change your address, or even if they launch charges for going to the loo in branches – their job is to make money from us. Bank charges reclaiming may be a big cost, but they’d try just as hard to add whatever charges they can on, with or without it. - If account fees were coming they would’ve already happened.
It always makes me laugh that articles often refer back to the April 06 OFT opinion that effectively reduced credit card charges and say “lots of new credit card charges have been introduced because of the OFT case”.
Many credit card charges were launched because the bank found another way to bamboozle customers into giving it more money. Do you really think once they thought of this, they wouldn’t have introduced te charges anyway?
Bank charges reclaiming has been around three years now. Over £1 billion is thought to have been paid out, and the banks have at the same time (though not caused by it) collapsed, yet STILL we haven’t seen the end of ‘free banking’.
Jon Snow, as part of a Channel 4 news interview on bank charges, way in 2007/8 said he bet banks would start introducing charges for cash machine withdrawals – we still haven’t seen it.
Q. “People knew about these charges, its their own fault?”
A. These charges are unlawful, and hopefully the courts will soon back that up. The fact people knew about them doesn’t change their illegality.
If I walked up to someone in the street, told them I was going to punch them, then punched them – the fact I’d prewarned doesn’t make my actions any more legal.
Banks have been unlawfully taking money, and they’ve been doing it without asking. Remember if British Gas thinks you owe it money it needs take you to court to do so. If a bank wants your money, it just takes it – one reason they’ve avoided court decisions for so long – they’ve been able to create their own ‘justice’.
Worse while there is competition in the bank account market as a whole, there’s never been competition in the bank charges sector - if you don’t like the charges there’s no way to avoid it – all banks levy the same charges.
Over the last few years more and more companies have pushed, discounted and cajoled us into paying by Direct Debit. If you don’t you pay more; or in some cases can’t even get a deal. When you factor that it in to the ‘manage your money argument’. It gets very difficult; with automated payouts if you dont have the money, it disappears anyway. Direct Debit bouncing is a big trigger for many bank charges.
Q. “These people deserve what they get, they’re stealing the banks money?”
A. This one’s a complete myth, banks invented bank charges to make money, they’re not being ‘stolen from’.
In days of yore, if you attempted to pay a Direct Debit or cheque with insufficient money in your account it simply wasn’t paid out. Then, probably because some bright banking spark decided that more money could be made if they did pay out, things were changed.
Now, the real system is hidden, but it works like this:
· Authorised overdraft e.g. up to £500
· Unauthorised paid limit e.g. up to £1,000 your money will still be paid but you'll be given a bank charge
· Unauthorised unpaid limit e.g. beyond £1,000 here no payment will be made.
You have to admire the profiteering genius of this system. Instead of not paying, the banks created a system where they would pay out, but would charge £35 a pop for every transaction – no matter how small – beyond that limit. It’s no wonder they now make from £1.6bn to £3bn a year from this.
In the past once you couldn’t pay out you’d know as the payment wouldn’t go through. Yet this new system meant many many more penalty charges could be levied as people paid for things on cards in stores, and all went through fine without realising there’d be a £35 charge every time.
If banks didn’t want people to take the cash, they simply wouldn’t pay it out.
Q. Actual question sent to my NOTW column... “Why don’t you advise these scrotes to keep a more watchful eye on their own finances so they don't go overdrawn in the first place. It ain't rocket science: if you can't afford it, don't spend it?“
A. In one way the questions right, as I always explain, the best way to beat charges is avoidance. Keep track of what’s in your account, do a budget, and manage your money carefully.
Yet in the main the questions a disgusting slur on the millions who’ve had charges. I got involved in the campaign to reclaim bank charges after meeting a single mum, a carer for her autistic son. She NEVER overspent, but a benefits office glitch meant it paid out late, so five direct debits bounced, meaning nearly £200 of charges.
Of course she couldn’t pay. I met her a year later when charges on the charges meant she owed £3,000. A good swathe of the UK are victims of this malicious financial injustice: charges are designed to penalise and entrap.
Martin Lewis, Money Saving Expert.
Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance.
Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance.
Don't miss out on urgent MoneySaving, get my weekly e-mail at www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips.
Debt-Free Wannabee Official Nerd Club: (Honorary) Members number 000
0
Comments
-
If a charge is found to be unreasonable, should all the charge be refunded, or only the unreasonable element (the charge less the bank's overheaded costs for administering the unauthorised facility and the charge)?There's love in this world for everyone. Every rascal and son of a gun.
It's for the many and not the few. Be sure it's out there looking for you.
In every town, in every state. In every house and every gate.
Wth every precious smile you make. And every act of kindness.
Micheal Marra, 1952 - 20120 -
My first issue is multi reclaiming.....People who have reclaimed thousands reclaiming again within a year.
My second issue is saying these charges are unlawful. Are they? Or is that just what we are saying until the court case is sorted (I genuinely don't know).0 -
Hi
what about the new type of charges like the barclays reserve fees,,,
still classed as charges but now seen to be an alterntive but is it in reality?
of course you get to know before hand what the charge is but even so, the bank says its all about transparancy to the customer does it help the normal man on the street to have 22.00 charge once you go into the reserve amount and 8.00 a pop for failed direct debits, etc
im still trying to learn more about this myself, but this was my own thoughts for your article,
cheers and keep on going, mazSealed Pot Challenge member 1525
"Knowledge is the Power to get Debt Free":j
Truecall device, stops all the unneccesary phone calls - my sanity has been restored and the peace in the house is truely priceless!:rotfl:0 -
I find your post weighted martin , your stuck in your idea and simply wont budge.
It is normal elsewhere in the world to charge for accounts , and this will happen.Those that use the likes of mse to save every penny , rather than spend more than they have results in these bank charges ,the rest ofus will have to pay more.
Everything will have a tarrif from now on , and has already started with the likes of abbey wanting a fiver for a statement in branch.Next is charging everyone to take money out of an atm , or for every direct debit.
Your defeating the idea of your site of "money saving" , if the people had enough cash in their accounts then there would have been no charges whatsoever.However if the charge was the banks fault then a simple call would have commuted it , if they didnt then these are the only people that have a legitimate claim.
If the banks never paid out an account holders direct debits , which resulted in charges , then a third party would have suffered financially through no fault of their own.This may have impacted on the credit limit of the account holder , and importantly led to even more expenses accrued for debt retreival or in removal of a service.
Perhaps I am one of those that grew up in a very small minority where your money was your own , you spent no more than you had , and actually managed your finances.In these days of internet banking it couldnt be any simpler.
There is many posts on the forum regarding accepting responsibility of ones own life , this includes finances.If this was a regular occurrence to the account holder does that not tell you something?
I have had one charge in 30 years of banking , with the same bank , and the same credit card with them from the age of 18 ....but maybe I was in the wrong?Have you tried turning it off and on again?0 -
I have a daughter who in the past had quite large bank charges - single parent on income support (at the time) - with at the time a basic bank account.
Income support goes in the bank on say a Monday - direct debits due on Monday - bank would pay the direct debits - putting her into overdraft - because the dd's came out before the payment to her was credited - they could see the payment sitting there.
When she looked at her statement the dd's & payment were on the same day - but the bank said they happened at different times of the day. It took months to find out how she kept getting charges - but found out in the end.
Also basic bank accounts have no overdraft facility - so how come they pushed her into overdraft (when they knew the money was there), when the best thing in that case would have been not to pay the dd and let the recipient call for the money again the next day, but that would have meant they would have forgone thousands in bank charges. Once it had happened once on such a tight budget - it was a sod to get out of.
Profiteering pure and simple, in her case and probably lots like her.
I'll bet if there hadn't been a payment sitting there waiting to be credited they wouldn't have paid the direct debits.
And is it lawful to push an account into overdraft when no such facility exists? When the actual account precludes an overdraft facility.0 -
chopperharris wrote: »I find your post weighted martin , your stuck in your idea and simply wont budge.
It is normal elsewhere in the world to charge for accounts , and this will happen.Those that use the likes of mse to save every penny , rather than spend more than they have results in these bank charges ,the rest ofus will have to pay more.
Everything will have a tarrif from now on , and has already started with the likes of abbey wanting a fiver for a statement in branch.Next is charging everyone to take money out of an atm , or for every direct debit.
Your defeating the idea of your site of "money saving" , if the people had enough cash in their accounts then there would have been no charges whatsoever.However if the charge was the banks fault then a simple call would have commuted it , if they didnt then these are the only people that have a legitimate claim.
If the banks never paid out an account holders direct debits , which resulted in charges , then a third party would have suffered financially through no fault of their own.This may have impacted on the credit limit of the account holder , and importantly led to even more expenses accrued for debt retreival or in removal of a service.
Perhaps I am one of those that grew up in a very small minority where your money was your own , you spent no more than you had , and actually managed your finances.In these days of internet banking it couldnt be any simpler.
There is many posts on the forum regarding accepting responsibility of ones own life , this includes finances.If this was a regular occurrence to the account holder does that not tell you something?
I have had one charge in 30 years of banking , with the same bank , and the same credit card with them from the age of 18 ....but maybe I was in the wrong?
As noted this thread is about questions rather than debating the issues. I've had a look through and I dont think you're mentioning anything I've not covered and responded to in my answers above? (thinking i'm wrong is slightly different to that)Martin Lewis, Money Saving Expert.
Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance.Don't miss out on urgent MoneySaving, get my weekly e-mail at www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips.Debt-Free Wannabee Official Nerd Club: (Honorary) Members number 0000 -
Is it possible to include a push to get banks to mention their charges/rates/APR etc on a monthly statement? My credit card does so I can always see what's what but my bank (Abbey) doesn't. I called them a few months back just to confirm what the rate was on my current account as I couldn't find out otherwise, short of going into the branch (no 'net access at the time).
Whilst this wouldn't change any of the charges etc it would highlight exactly what's what, something I feel the banks don't do &, at times, hide behind a veil of secrecy.
ps.it's SCEPTICAL!
@ LBM = £15,872.65, now £10,819.82AF Jan = 7/? Feb = 5/14 Mar = 14/20 Apr = 6/14 May = 2/14 June 2/14 July 0/TF Aug 1/TFv Sept 6/TF Oct 4/7"NEVER DOUBT YOUR OWN QUALITY"0 -
Martin, can I suggest that you seek to clarify the difference between clearly unfair penalty charges (such as bank charges) and charges which are wholly justified? I think many people seem to think that a 20GBP charge for something (like a money transfer into PLN, which usually has to go via EUR) is the same as a 20GBP charge for being 10 pence overdrawn - ie, that both are absolutely unfair.
There does seem to be a lot of misinformation floating around the internet concerning what exactly is fair and what isn't fair.
Something like "So what is fair and what is unfair?" could be useful - and would give us something to reference
From Poland...with love.
They are (they're) sitting on the floor.
Their books are lying on the floor.
The books are sitting just there on the floor.0 -
So rather than ring up and move the Direct Debits to the next day she chose to go on paying charges for several months that she is now no doubt trying to reclaim?baileysbattlebus wrote: »I have a daughter who in the past had quite large bank charges - single parent on income support (at the time) - with at the time a basic bank account.
Income support goes in the bank on say a Monday - direct debits due on Monday - bank would pay the direct debits - putting her into overdraft - because the dd's came out before the payment to her was credited - they could see the payment sitting there.
When she looked at her statement the dd's & payment were on the same day - but the bank said they happened at different times of the day. It took months to find out how she kept getting charges - but found out in the end.
Also basic bank accounts have no overdraft facility - so how come they pushed her into overdraft (when they knew the money was there), when the best thing in that case would have been not to pay the dd and let the recipient call for the money again the next day, but that would have meant they would have forgone thousands in bank charges. Once it had happened once on such a tight budget - it was a sod to get out of.
Profiteering pure and simple, in her case and probably lots like her.
I'll bet if there hadn't been a payment sitting there waiting to be credited they wouldn't have paid the direct debits.
And is it lawful to push an account into overdraft when no such facility exists? When the actual account precludes an overdraft facility.I think....0 -
So rather than ring up and move the Direct Debits to the next day she chose to go on paying charges for several months that she is now no doubt trying to reclaim?
Glad you said it. I started typing "why not just change the DD's to a Tuesday!?", but thought it was rather rude!
This is the kind of thing though where I do get annoyed with the whole reclaiming thing. A bit of responsibilty at the customers end and there would be nothing to reclaim. It's now likely I will end up paying because they didn't simply sort it out very simply.
This website has never, as far as I have seen, in any of the main articles, mentioned anything like this. Just a simple line saying "the easiest way is to not get charged in the first place".
In the above case, I cannot see why the charges are unlawful in any way. It's like me spending my wages before I have got them. Hardly the banks fault. It's purely mine.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards