MSE News: Bank charges result at 9.45am Wednesday

bonnit

jamespir wrote: »

does anyone have a link to what martin had to say would like watch it

the link i posted on the previous page had a summary of his statement on the bbc news website?

SillySpender

garthdp wrote: »

atlascommensense has just joined, is clearly here to provoke and upset people

ignore himor her or indeed it and he/she/it will soon get bored and go away

I'll second that.

jamespir

mramra wrote: »

Hey, well done, that'll teach them. :rolleyes:

immature but also quite sweet so well done

can just imagine hscbc manager

manager :tracy i asked you to put out the new leaflets this morning

tracey i did sir

manager :dont look like it to me

kiwigirluk

atlastcommonsense wrote: »

It appears like attention seeking to me, sorry but suicide is a losers way out and i have ZERO sympathy for it or the people who try it... Try spending a day in a childrens ward on a hospital with kids who are dying and have no choice then try and have sympathy for attention seeking individuals who have choices !!!

Sorry it might offend, but its the truth.

Unfortunately the reasons why they were both in the situation was after spending years in childrens wards; both siblings have asthma, heart murmurs and epilepsy. Sister has diabetes (type 1, not type 2), and brother has crohns disease. Our family has a large farm and both had disappeared off to do it - they certainly werent sitting in the living room doing it as a Saturday afternoon matinee!

Meanwhile back on topic, I sincerely hope that the OFT pulls its finger out, and that this isnt the end of war, just the start of a new battle

dsypml

mikeandrach wrote: »

jancey b you made a genuine error, you parked your car too close to mine, please cani help myself to £200+ of your money?

if the answer is yes pm me, if its no then why the hell is my issue any different, an error is an error, a fine is a punishment

If you have a contract with someone which states they will pay you £200 if they park their car too close then they have to pay you £200 when they park their car too close.

How about this:

I went to Starbucks and saw that a cup of coffee was £1.90 but when I asked for a cup of coffee they charged me £1.90. It only costs 20p for them to give me the cup of coffee so THIS IS NOT FAIR. I can't go to the courts because Starbucks has bribed the judges. I can't go to another coffee shop because they all charge the same. Last one out, turn off the lights, this is rip-off Britain :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

In the real world, outside of the whinger community on MSE, that is what the arguments against charges look like.

I was twice charged by a credit card company because I made a mistake over Bank Holidays. They always seem to demand payment on a Sunday or a BH and it takes 3 days to reach them, so the real payment day is 5 or 6 days earlier. It costs nothing to work this out, and takes about 10 seconds. When I failed to spend 10 seconds getting it right it cost me dear, in line with the contract I signed.

I was also charged on two occasions by my bank for going overdrawn on my current account. Each time it was the fault of a gas/electric company who took a Direct Debit too early. Because the bank was within the terms of its contract and the gas people were not, it is to those that I complained. They apologised and reimbursed the costs I'd incurred. Since then I keep a larger balance in my current acount. That's what happens in the real world.

By the way, taking leaflets from banks and recycling them does not help the environment, because they will have to be reprinted. That's like a policy of breaking windows to stimulate the economy by providing work for glaziers; or a policy of crushing perfectly good cars.

aligerdie wrote: »

I don't think the reputation of Martin Lewis has been hit for six - if that's your view, perhaps you should consider expressing it somewhere other than his website.....

I am grateful for the way he has stood up for the general public, who else is prepared to do that?

This decision is disappointing obviously. But just because I have been awaiting a payout for charges doesn't mean I have the inability to manage my finances - you know nothing about peoples circumstances at all.

Expressing it on his website means he's more likely to see it. :money:

Waiting for a payout is a good sign that you are unable to manage your finances. The other indication is the £16,203.81 debt you mention in your signature.

Jeff_Says...

The_Hallowed_Way wrote: »

Very mature. Well done.

The consumer will ultimately have to pay for those leaflets, the banks overheads are built into the price for loans, bank account etc. Please think about this...

mikeandrach_2

i realise its immature and agree with you, ut what else can the guy in the street do? banks punish people at the drop of a hat, but we are powerless to figth back, they are making it as awkward as possible for people to get help. removing chairs/furniture etc is clearly theft so not possible, but removing leaflets that are usually displayed with a sticker syaing please take one, is legal and it costs the bank money. leafelts are cheap but the delviery costs ar ehuge due to the weight, so at least delivery companies will earn a few more quid! i will do this eveyr time i pass a bank, its the only thing i can think of that is legal that will cost the banks money.

jamespir

kiwigirluk wrote: »

Unfortunately the reasons why they were both in the situation was after spending years in childrens wards; both siblings have asthma, heart murmurs and epilepsy. Sister has diabetes (type 1, not type 2), and brother has crohns disease. Our family has a large farm and both had disappeared off to do it - they certainly werent sitting in the living room doing it as a Saturday afternoon matinee!

Meanwhile back on topic, I sincerely hope that the OFT pulls its finger out, and that this isnt the end of war, just the start of a new battle

you don't need to explain yourself or your families actions to any of us ignore him and have a nice day :T

phillh79

iolanthe07 wrote: »

Could one of the blessed who have never been charged a fee explain now how they would be worse off under that system?

If you keep between £5K and £7K in a Lloyds Vantage current account, not only do you not pay any charges, but you get quite a respectable 4.5% interest. I opened one of these a few weeks ago and am very happy with it.

If I had 5k to spare I wouldnt be on the limit of my account each month. This ruling affects those who don't have the spare cash available. I don't have a flashy lifestyle but I make sure my child has a decent life. Hopefully there is still another avenue to go down.

jamespir

mikeandrach wrote: »

i realise its immature and agree with you, ut what else can the guy in the street do? banks punish people at the drop of a hat, but we are powerless to figth back, they are making it as awkward as possible for people to get help. removing chairs/furniture etc is clearly theft so not possible, but removing leaflets that are usually displayed with a sticker syaing please take one, is legal and it costs the bank money. leafelts are cheap but the delviery costs ar ehuge due to the weight, so at least delivery companies will earn a few more quid! i will do this eveyr time i pass a bank, its the only thing i can think of that is legal that will cost the banks money.

just dont get arreseted would not be fun