MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

Edinburghlass_2

Enough! There have been some really nasty posts over the last 24 hours, the worst of which have been removed. This is not what MSE is all about so please stop the name calling.

fermi

PROLIANT wrote: »

...and they will be full auth cards too - no spending what you havent got.

As you know, been there. Never again.

chuckl1es

Stephenbw wrote: »

Of course the loan was pre-arranged; they arranged a meeting with the treasury and negotiated a loan which they repaid within 6 months. How else do you think they got it?

Did the banks get penalised/fined when they screwed up?

orc_2

PROLIANT wrote: »

Why?



I have a hard job too, your point?



We as in the collective losers? :think:



oh now I am hurt.....not.

You are not interested in reasoned debate about the test case and have limited capacity to participate in discussion. Your raison d'etre is solely to wind up people who have an interest in the test case.

You might need Money Saving Expert but it don't need you PAL.;)

PROLIANT

orc wrote: »

You are not interested in reasoned debate about the test case and have limited capacity to participate in discussion. Your raison d'etre is solely to wind up people who have an interest in the test case.

Who am I winding up? All I am asking for is my questions answered without being barked at.

orc wrote: »

You might need Money Saving Expert but it don't need you PAL.;)

I most certainly do not need this site - and I am not your PAL.
So, are my questions going to answered or not?

fantasy_dreams

what really annoys me is this part of the ruling:

Lord Walker commented that ministers and Parliament had decided to transpose the directive

as it stood rather than to confer the higher degree of consumer protection afforded by the
national laws of some other member states. Parliament might wish to consider whether to
revisit that decision (Para 52). Lord Mance endorsed this comment ( Para 118).

So we are part of the EU and have to adhere to all sorts of stupid laws, but we don't get the same protection ?

euronorris

I can't believe how late people were still posting last night! I guess there are a lot more 'night owls' out there than I realised.

Anyway, a fresh day and a fresh approach. Instead of focusing on the win or loss (depending on how you feel), perhaps we should concentrate on ensuring that people are:

a) educated enough to understand and control their finances well, and
b) given help and support in order to guide them through a mistake or a tough financial time in their life (ie, redundancy, family death, etc)

If we all insisted that bank's acted quicker to ensure that debt's did not escalate beyond control, by offering financial guidance (you know, like they used to), then perhaps we would never have needed to bail them out in the first place.

The onus for responsible lending should be on them, and yet, even now I hear of people 20k in debt on a 14k salary. WHY did the banks ever lend them that much? It is crystal clear to everyone that they cannot afford to pay that back.

Similarly, if someone is receiving charge after charge, no matter who's at fault, this is the point when the bank should be calling them in for a meeting to discuss and resolve the situation. If caught early and treated with some common sense, then everyone would benefit. The banks wouldn't continue charging people who have no hope of paying back. And those folk are given the guidance and support they need to get back in the black.

I also think that financial planning should be compulsory in schools. Not everyone is good at understanding financial products and some have real trouble with figures, but a little guidance and explanation could make a huge difference. I understand that parents should be passing this onto their children also, but the reality is that not all parents understand it well enough themselves in order to teach their children. They need help.

If we could all work together towards this solution then the number of charges applied would be minimal, and in theory, applied only to those with the 'don't care' attitude.

I welcome your thoughts and input.

PROLIANT

fantasy_dreams wrote: »

what really annoys me is this part of the ruling:

Lord Walker commented that ministers and Parliament had decided to transpose the directive

as it stood rather than to confer the higher degree of consumer protection afforded by the
national laws of some other member states. Parliament might wish to consider whether to
revisit that decision (Para 52). Lord Mance endorsed this comment ( Para 118).

So we are part of the EU and have to adhere to all sorts of stupid laws, but we don't get the same protection ?

I agree that consumers should be protected from the flaws and errors in the Banking system, however on the same note we need to be more careful while managing our money.

If you live in a world where you "think" you are entitled to spend £50 on your debit card when in fact your available balance is only £49.50 then you have issues that need addressing - just generalising here mind.

If we say to our selves "I don't have the cleared funds for this purchase therefore I will choose not to place myself in a position where I will make myself go overdrawn" then we stand a better chance at avoiding fines from the bank.

The main issue, more so on this board, is that people think they have a right to money that is not theirs and act irresponsibly with their own and the banks money, so 90% of the time it is the customer of the bank who makes the error based on either their own selfishness and lack of responsibility or through a general error.
If in the case of the latter then a quick phone call or visit to the branch will sort that one out and you will find the bank will refund the charge as a gesture of good will - as long as you don't have a history of being stupid with money.

In the event that the bank or another company has made an error causing you to incur an automatic fee from the banks computer systems then this should be pursued until you are refunded and or compensated in some way.

Quanz2

Wow.
To save anyone reading all the posts in this thread I have summarised the two sides.
1 - "I've gone overdrawn and incurred bank charges"
2 - "Its your own fault, dont spend money you dont have"
1 - "The banks are ripping me off"
2 - "You are paying for my free banking"
1 - "People that work in banks are scum"
2 - "Your a loser"
1 - "Your pathetic"
2 - "Your an idiot"

Perhaps we could have a special thread for people who just want to throw insults at each other.
Does anyone actually have anything worth saying, from either side of the fence?

orc_2

PROLIANT wrote: »

Who am I winding up? All I am asking for is my questions answered without being barked at.


I most certainly do not need this site - and I am not your PAL.
So, are my questions going to answered or not?

Have I barked at you PAL?

No.