MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

Matt16v

euronorris wrote: »

I have mentioned the court case and the outcome to a few of my colleagues and they are both baffled and stunned. Everyone pays a small fee for their bank account here. They also only pay a small fee should they become overdrawn without authorisation. And, if you start to struggle financially, the bank calls you in for a chat to discuss the options and negotiate realistic repayment terms. They want their money back at the end of the day, but they are more logical and supportive about doing it.

But then, there aren't as many people in debt here (outside of mortgage's) as they have a different view and culture towards money as a country. And they are very good at educating their children and each other about it.

Haven't really got anything to add to that, you can't say it any better than that!

seven-day-weekend

Maybe the best thing now for those people who find themselves getting charged every month is to have NO transactions other than the initial deposit going through the bank. i.e draw your money out as soon as it comes in and pay all your bills in cash at the post office.

I have lived in rural Spain for five years, and most small businesses here won't accept any other method of payment than cash (our friends even had to pay the Renault dealer in cash for their new car). I do have direct debits here (electricity, phone, internet), but it would be simple enough to cancel them and pay in cash. Other than these few things,, we live by cash anyway while we are in Spain.

It can still be done, it's a pain in the backside, but at least there are no more charges.

euronorris

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Maybe the best thing now for those people who find themselves getting charged every month is to have NO transactions other than the initial deposit going through the bank. i.e draw your money out as soon as it comes in and pay all your bills in cash at the post office.

I have lived in rural Spain for five years, and most small businesses here won't accept any other method of payment than cash (our friends even had to pay the Renault dealer in cash for their new car). I do have direct debits here (electricity, phone, internet), but it would be simple enough to cancel them and pay in cash. Other than these few things,, we live by cash anyway while we are in Spain.

It can still be done, it's a pain in the backside, but at least there are no more charges.

Which may work for some, but not for the others.

For some, this could cause more problems than it solves. If they are having trouble keeping track now, then they would be awful at doing things manually.

The country, as a whole, needs education in this area.

Let's not forget that ANY contract would be very daunting to someone with dyslexia, and the time of banks explaining their and your obligations seems to have passed. It needs to come back.

After all, if you were lending money to someone, wouldn't you ensure that they fully understood the terms of the agreement? I would explain it fully in person first, then confirm it in writing. And, if I had any reason to suspect that they didn't quite fully understand, I would be asking them questions to ascertain how much they did understand. After all, I would want to ensure that my money is repaid.

spacetraveller

The banks should be wearing masks and carrying swag bags! I don't completely disagree with charges, but to charge up to £38 for a returned direct debit is appalling, they should charge what it costs - it does not cost £38 to send a computer generated letter! The government have bailed out these banks with taxpayers money and they are still paying these bankers massive bonuses (with some of the profit they make with our charges - no doubt!) It is a dis-honest, secretive business.

fullfacility

The Supreme Court ruling is excellent news. The 80% of us who manage their accounts properly were dreading having to subsidise the 20% who can't/don't.
One of the bigest problems facing the country is the refusal of people to face up to the consequences of their own actions. It's always somedody else's fault.
If they didn't like the terms and conditions they shouldn't have voluntarily asigned up to them. Instead they complain and now try to jump on the compensation culture bandwaggon and extort money out of someone. These people shouldn't be given any encouragement.

seven-day-weekend

euronorris wrote: »

Which may work for some, but not for the others.

For some, this could cause more problems than it solves. If they are having trouble keeping track now, then they would be awful at doing things manually.

The country, as a whole, needs education in this area.

Let's not forget that ANY contract would be very daunting to someone with dyslexia, and the time of banks explaining their and your obligations seems to have passed. It needs to come back.

After all, if you were lending money to someone, wouldn't you ensure that they fully understood the terms of the agreement? I would explain it fully in person first, then confirm it in writing. And, if I had any reason to suspect that they didn't quite fully understand, I would be asking them questions to ascertain how much they did understand. After all, I would want to ensure that my money is repaid.

But they would not be getting direct debits bounced and charges added! If they can't remeber to pay their bills then why should the bank have to foot the bill?

My son has Asperger's Syndrome and because of this, for a long while he was totally unable to cope with direct debits and accrued himself some bank charges, because he always forgot to allow for the dd's going out when he checked his bank balance. He was much better when he cancelled the Direct Debits and just paid the bills when they came (after drawing out his budget at the start of the week - bills budgeted for over the month and money kept separately). He said it was because he could see at a glance how much money he had left after paying the bill.

Many people need to be able to actually SEE their money to be able to budget effectively.

MrLeeLee

A new user coming on here saying that it's good banks are allowed to do whatever the hell they want, whenever the hell they want?!

God, whatever next?! At least you'll get a thanks from mrarmra or whatever his name is.

mramra

Correct, 80% of current account holders are affected positively by this ruling as banks don't need to introduce current account charging to cover the costs of unfairly re-imbursing people who have mis-managed (to be polite) their finances. 20% of current account holders (of whom an even smaller percentage have genuine grounds to say they have been treated unfairly) lose. Surely on the whole an 80% 'win-rate' is a good thing?

mramra

This board is by its nature very biased towards those trying to claim back charges. This discussion on the bank account board is more representative of the public as a whole: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2103729

pingchris

lol lol good news is it,not for you people who say you are great supporters of the decision,good luck when they get into you for your cash,oh and dont think they wont because they will,you have cash remember,and the banks want it,do you think they stop taking with this ruling,lol you are there next victims.

id advise hiding your cash under the bed.oh but wait the government will tax anyone who does that,oh look they win again.