MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

unkle

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Sorry, did it cost the bank that amount of money to simply reject a payment then? :rolleyes:

If you're gonna be a smart arsey then at least think before typing! :rotfl:

and at which point did you mention anything about the cost v charge?
the post you responded to with "spot on" specifically said 'I'll refrain from commenting on the amount at the moment' and it was that I responded to.

:wall:

neverdespairgirl

MrLeeLee wrote: »

After two previous decisions going against the banks, I'm not sure they could have come out and said, they are fair, those courts were wrong, go away!

Tey did not say it was fair. That wasn't the issue before the court at all.

nsabournemouth

Do the banks say why they charge you if a payment is rejected and is it wrong to say we will charge you if a payment is rejected without explaining why?

Has anybody asked the banks to advise them as to what the cost is if a dd is not paid ie: How much has the breach of contract cost the bank?

natweststaffmember

nsabournemouth wrote: »

Do the banks say why they charge you if a payment is rejected and is it wrong to say we will charge you if a payment is rejected without explaining why?

Has anybody asked the banks to advise them as to what the cost is if a dd is not paid ie: How much has the breach of contract cost the bank?

Yes is the answer and the answer is that they cannot reveal the real cost due to commercial reasons, in answer to your second question.

nsabournemouth

natweststaffmember wrote: »

Yes is the answer and the answer is that they cannot reveal the real cost due to commercial reasons, in answer to your second question.

So when a DD is not paid what do the banks do and what service do they provide in that charge?

Alpine_Star

nsabournemouth wrote: »

So when a DD is not paid what do the banks do and what service do they provide in that charge?

During the test case hearings the banks pleaded that the charge was made for the 'consideration' of whether to pay a DD or not and that this amounted to a service.

euronorris

Alpine_Star wrote: »

During the test case hearings the banks pleaded that the charge was made for the 'consideration' of whether to pay a DD or not and that this amounted to a service.

And yet, if the process is entirely automated (which it is), then no 'consideration' occurs. Surely?

Alpine_Star

But as the bank have provided the infrastucture for 'automatic' consideration it still follows that they provide a consideration service. Tough to swallow I know but this was all thrashed out during the hearings.

simon_templar_2

Exactly, everything costs something along the line.

euronorris

I was under the impression that all DD's were bounced if there were insufficient funds to pay them.

If not, what exactly is the consideration criteria?

What makes it OK to pay one DD and not another?

Genuine question, am interested to know.