MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

shopaholic2639

Its a terrible shame that the Banks won this...it seems in the current climate Banks can get away with almost anything. Lets not forget, us Tax Payers bailed out the struggling banks, only for them to make us struggle in turn. Complete unjustice to say the least!
I guess my thousands of pounds will remain in their pockets, I am still being charged monthly between £50-£200, I have attempted to speak with my bank on this matter. I have even requested that they take their fee's out on my payday rather than a week before when there is no money left in my account. They havent actioned this because it would mean they couldnt continually charge me for going overdrawn! Even if the reason I am overdrawn is because of their charges not because I have requested money from my account that isnt there!!! Total disgrace!!!
Something needs to be done to control them and stop them destroying this country even more.

pinkcloudnine

hatingutilities wrote: »

so does anyone know if there is a bank in UK that dont charge as much, or dont charge at all. there must be some banks out there that are more deserving of our money?

Lloyds do not charge us as we are always in credit. The gold account & its benefits [such as they are] for us is also free. We have no complaints about our bank, 32 yrs with them.
Please can someone explain how they have managed to accumalate such high charges? I would really like to know how the charging system works

DaveO

dirtydavey wrote: »

Dont be silly, NO one has ever said that you should pay for me to go over dwarn. The argument is that I should not pay for you to have free banking.

If it costs the bank £2.50 every time I go over drawn I will be happy to pay that. But it does not.

The problem here is that I am paying for you to have free banking! And thats what this is all about! I think you have massivly missed the point. We dont what a free ride, and we also dont want to give a free ride to you. We want whats fair, we will pay what it costs the bank for us to go over. (even though must of us have begged our banks not to make payment if there is no money in the account)

If they did that they would have to bounce cheques or return direct debits and would no doubt want to charge you for that as there is a cost involved. If you are arguing against free banking are you prepared to pay charges for those things?

Perhaps it should be made illegal for banks to make payments that would take customers over any agreed overdraft limit (which usually incurs even steeper charges) or to take an account overdrawn at all if there is no overdraft on the account.

As to charges subsidizing free banking where is this proven? They want my money so they can use it to make more money so in my opinion I get free banking in return for me letting them use my money while paying me next to no interest on it yet investing it as they see fit to make profits.

Isn't the end of free banking just a scare tactic regardless of this idea bank charges subsidize it?

angelflower_2

I do appreciate a lot of the comments from those people who have been successful in managing their finances well and I can certainly understand where you are coming from however, you must recognise that for many people, getting bank charges is not something they planned for nor want, and definately cannot afford. Bank charges happen for many reasons and the problems occur when daily charges are applied or charges are applied on top of charges etc. It is extrememly difficult for people to recover from the spiral just one charge can spark.

I know that when I took out an account, I agreed to pay charges however always hoped (and for the most part planned) to always be in the black. When you lose your job though and you have £20 left in the bank, your electric meter has run out and your kids havent eaten that day, you take the money thats there, hoping and praying you find a way to raise enough cash to put the money back before the direct debit comes out. Sometimes it works and other times it doesnt.

I do hope that for those of you up there on your high horse that you never have a period of poverty where you have to make those types of decisions because now the banks have been given this permission to make the charges whatever they deem fit, you will all end up paying now.

quantium

I am not surprised at this given the amounts (+VAT) solicitors charge for letters. The charges by banks are comparable, so a group of lawyers is hardly likely to say otherwise.
Solicitors' offices are incredibly inefficient, with practitioners using snail mail and telephone whereas email is far more efficient. I expect than banking suffers the same problems.
With email, messages, rather than people, are queued. A solicitor may spend hours listening to music, and recorded lies about their call being important, in order to speak to another call centre based law firm. This is charged to clients at a rate of £100 to £250 per hour (+VAT).
What is needed is thorough and public investigations into improving the efficiency of all administrative processes where the client is charged - soliciting at law, accountancy, banking, financial services and so on - so that costs can be brought down. I would not be surprised if a ten to one reduction in charges could not be achieved by the proper use of modern electronic technology.

Knackered

C_Mababejive wrote: »

Whats the problem?? ive hardly ever paid bank charges. If the banks had lost, they were threatening to charge everyone to recoup some costs of operating accounts.

Can someone tell me why i should pay charges when i run my accounts in such a way as to not endure charges..just so that others can run their accounts less efficiently AND get compensation payments for so called unfair charges??

If you're not reclaiming you've no business here.

oodlesofwotnots

Why am I not surprised that the Banks have won. We live in a very old fashioned way - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. It was obvious with the state of the economy that the poor little bankers wouldn't have to give us our money back. I say we bring back CASH MONEY with a pay packet at the end of the week. I'm sure we must be losing more money by internet / credit card fraud than we ever did by robberies and the odd 'heist'.
Well we've all just been heisted by the banks haven't we?

MrLeeLee

Dadooronron wrote: »

Why am I not surprised. The legal system in this country beggars belief. It is clear that it is not there for us, only for big business. It sucks.

Agree wholeheartedly with this.

Why should we have expected the decision to be anything other than in favour of the banks? Money talks (when you've got it)

PadiP

centurystar wrote: »

the banks win again!!!! had a feeling the banks had won as tsb called me twice this morning even though they sent me a letter 2 weeks ago saying they would not call me regarding re paying my bank charges till after test case as long as i keep up repayments. thanks a lot supreme court my life is to become a misery again (upto 10 calls a day from TSB demanding money even though they know i am in hardship) and i was just starting to get somewhere with then. So banks will now be able to charge what they like with no rules, great news in a recession!

If they are phoning you 10 times a day, or even once a day, if you tell them not to and they continue they are guilty of harassment, which is a serious criminal offence - all you have to do is let them know that you know that, and if they continue, call the police.

gerryscot

iceland_viking wrote: »

Credit card charges?

Will this affect my claiming charges on credit cards?
Thanks

No, not according to the article.

The result does not affect other reclaiming, including Credit card charges PPI etc