MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

euronorris

Stephenbw wrote: »

Don't be silly; elderly people are paid £125 each specifically for their winter fuel bills.

And yet it still happens....

We have deaths every year due to them forgoing the basic necessity of heat in favour of trying to pay other bills. Such as, for instance, bank charges, or any kind of credit facility that the bank should never have allowed to someone on such a low income in the first place.

Not everything is black and white. Open your eyes!

ollski

Doc_N wrote: »

If you take someone else's money without their permission, you should expect to pay a penalty for doing it. I wonder how Saint Martin would feel if someone dipped into his account and 'borrowed' a few quid without telling him.

Get it quite frequently, 35.00 at a time only I don't get it returned. Isn't this where we started??

superdood

Oh my lord there's so much cr*p on here and before anyone starts with the abuse can I just say I'm on the fence here, and looking down at both sides I can see how stooopid you all look argueing the toss over hypothetical scenarios and boastful spiteful gloating, no ones going to win this arguement 'cause everyones determined to have the last word......

However, do continue to make yourselves look completely daft......I find it entertaining and theres nothing on the tele :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Premier_2

Stephenbw wrote: »

Don't be silly; elderly people are paid £125 each specifically for their winter fuel bills.

Isn't that for the grandkids chrissy prezzies?

nellyboy

a lot of people on here are mentioning the word prudent or prudence........

if i remember rightly there once was a chancellor of the exchequer who said he was "prudent"....look at the bother he got himself into when that didnt work out!

it aint over yet. all the people in credit and doing well whilst others are hurting.... watch out.

there will be a sway away from the free banking model, it just isnt viable for very much longer.
and if you actually look at our cousins in NZ and South africa, i think you will find that in a banking model where all pay for their accounts, then if you are in credit you, as such, will still get back your fee and then some.....so it isnt all bad.

there was a knee jerk reaction early on by a lot of people.... the papers and medial will always "sensationalize" a "spectacular" like this....it aint over yet, not by a long chalk.

and the longer it draws on, the more 8% interest is growing on all the claims all the time......

neverdespairgirl

gooner72 wrote: »

If someone offered you £10000 of your money back from the bank and asked for £1000 only on a no win/no fee basis, what would you do?

I'd check with the FSA and the Law Society, and report you to either or both if it was (as I suspect it was) offering services you weren't allowed to offer.

euronorris

Postyman wrote: »

Lets hope there is now an end to all this nonsense. Why should those of us who keep our accounts in credit be forced to pay for unscrupulous people who take money from the Banks without prior agreement?

Firstly you aren't. The notion that has been fed to you all, that it is the revenue generated by charges which provide for free banking, is absurd! There was free banking in the past before all of these charges!

Secondly. The service you currently receive is not free, you are only benefitting from not being charged for it. Why do so many of you believe you are entitled to free banking?

Doc_N

Doc_N wrote: »

This was always a ridiculous cause. If you take someone else's money without their permission, you should expect to pay a penalty for doing it. I wonder how Saint Martin would feel if someone dipped into his account and 'borrowed' a few quid without telling him.

ollski wrote: »

Get it quite frequently, 35.00 at a time only I don't get it returned. Isn't this where we started??

The only difference, of course, is that you took their money without permission, and you'd already agreed in advance to the charge by accepting the T&C.

Rallydriver

gooner72 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. For the record everyone i got money back for were happy to give me £200 - £800 for a return of £1000 - £16000. It wasn't just one letter per person, the disabled lady who had over £15000 returned, needed me to get the money from 5 separate banks.Please ask yourself this If someone offered you £10000 of your money back from the bank and asked for £1000 only on a no win/no fee basis, what would you do? My friends are over £140 000 better off and between 30 of them the have given me £7000. To date not one of my friends has asked for my charge back, if this changes i will let you know

So, did you declare these earnings to the HMRC or the benefits agency if appropriate? Are you registered with the Ministry of Justice or did you just break the law left, right and centre?:rotfl:

vet8

Pammy wrote: »

From the outset I have seen people debate the rights and wrongs of the bank charges but money aside who regulates the process to which the banks actually take charges?

My situation was one where I was told I had a very serious illness, as a result my life was turned on its head for a while. Going over a pound or two for a period of time resulted in massive lump sum of charges. I knew when this money came out all my direct debits would hit resulting in further charges.

I literally begged Abbey National not to take the money out in one go, eventually talking to their head office. Nobody was willing to help, my circumstances were not taken into consideration, infact they were rather cold about it.

As a result of the money coming out I was sent on a downward spiral if debt, more charges hitting every month.

If it had been anyone else that was owed money legally I am able nnegociate a pay back solution. But not in this case, they were able to do what they wanted to and I had no say.

Todays ruling for me wasnt about the money, it was about the banks power of doing what they want. They were happy for me to spiral into debt, it meant they could get more money out of my situation.

Is the message now that this is acceptable?

This says it all.

There are so many holier-than-thou posters on here who are so keen to assume that everyone in debt is just spending the money for the hell of it, but everyone I have ever met who is overdrawn is that way because they are struggling financially, they do not do it for fun.

I also think that those posters who think that we will have free banking now are simply deluding themselves. The banks have won and will feel that they can carry on doing what they want. They will introduce charges anyway even when they can keep their extortionate overdraught charges. According to an article I read in the paper more than half of customers do not have free banking anyway, they are on those accounts that charge a monthly fee. What is the betting that these are increased more and more so that those who do not pay monthly fees will find their banking severely restricted.

This is a very sad day for the consumer, the banks win and they will screw us all.