MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

euronorris

simon_templar wrote: »

You dont deserve to know anything!! Do you not understand the difference between cost price and retail price??

Of course I do. But I do not agree that this is a 'service'. And if the banks have argued, in court, that it is because of the 'consideration' applied, then yes, we do deserve to know the criteria involved.

Why wouldn't you want to know this? You may find you make a mistake one month. Wouldn't you at least like to understand the supposed 'consideration' that had been applied to your financial situation by the banks?

euronorris

Biskit wrote: »

I'm only gonna give my experiences on this cause obviously everyones had totally different 'run-ins' with the banks. In 20 odd years of doing my banking with the same bank I've gone over my overdraft limit twice, both times being charged silly amounts for going over a few pounds. On both occasions I've had to write directly to the banks branch manager after having no joy via the call-center or actually in-branch. Both times I've had the charges refunded. Why ? I'm not sure !

My point is though that I get 'free' banking, with interest on my money, because I am, relatively, careful with my finances. If someone continues to go over their agreed overdraft limit time & time again spending money that simply isn't theirs to spend why should I be penalised for it by losing my 'free' banking. I'm glad that the banks eventually won out (for now). Now, having said that I do agree when imposed the charges are too high and are not in keeping with any costs the bank incur !

As I say my experiences with my bank have on both occasions been favourable & as I say I know not everyone gets the same treatment even if they have only had one or two minor problems like myself. But in general terms if you're gonna spend money that isn't yours then you're gonna have to pay for it - I would much rather it be that than everyone (including myself) having to pay charges on, say, every transaction that I made through the bank. Looking after number 1 ? Perhaps but why should I pay for folks who CONSISTENTLY live beyond their means.

Before you all start hounding me please note that I said 'consistently' - If it's a genuine mistake on the very odd occasion then the banks have to be more lenient, as they have been in my case.

You're not receiving 'free banking'. The interest your money earns the bank is higher than what they pay you.

Trust me, you pay for your services one way or the other.

mackers8923

mramra wrote: »

Why? You helped yourself to money that isn't yours. Why shouldn't the bank charge you whatever it feels is fair?

If you came around to my house and took £10 out of my wallet I would be livid. I wouldn't just want the £10 back, I would expect further consequences for your actions.

I'm sorry no that argument falls flat on its face, for one I can stop you from coming into my house and helping yourself to my money. Do the banks do this, do they !!!!!!, they will let you try to do it and for the hell of it charge you an amount of money, now you explain to me how that is fair.

Don't get me wrong this is not all the banks fault however they also have the option to help people get out of this situation and quite simply they do not do it.

Can you justify £38 for refusing to pay a direct debit which is more than likely decided by a computer which literally costs the bank nothing!

unkle

mackers8923 wrote: »

See your little icon there with the head banging, I like it because thats the average day for someone trying to get by. The amount was not important, what was important was the bank refused to help my friend, he then ended up almost £150 short this month.

This is were the banks need to be held to account how they can put someone so easily into such big trouble has to be wrong. Oh the bankers all had fun on Wednesday and they were smiling all the way to the bar (I was in London on Wed)

a side from your point another thing winging about is this so called "End to free banking"

Is there such a thing? I'm quite lucky in my 12 years of employment my salary has always been between £12,000 and £34,000 in that time I have never experienced this so called free banking so they may as well cut that crap out. Unless that is there is some secret banking services for those earning more than say £34k a year....!

We all pay for banking one way or another already!

If the amount is not important then what is this post;

"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!"

Make your mind up.

euronorris

mackers8923 wrote: »

I'm sorry no that argument falls flat on its face, for one I can stop you from coming into my house and helping yourself to my money. Do the banks do this, do they !!!!!!, they will let you try to do it and for the hell of it charge you an amount of money, now you explain to me how that is fair.

Don't get me wrong this is not all the banks fault however they also have the option to help people get out of this situation and quite simply they do not do it.

Can you justify £38 for refusing to pay a direct debit which is more than likely decided by a computer which literally costs the bank nothing!

The cost isn't zero. That's not correct.

The computers cost money, the programming costs money and the maintenance costs money.

There is a cost involved, but it is far less than the charges imposed. I think it has been estimated at around 2.50.

Biskit

"You're not receiving 'free banking'. The interest your money earns the bank is higher than what they pay you. Trust me, you pay for your services one way or the other."

That may be so but it's not physically costing me anything - they're taking their cut of the money they make with my money and giving me (maybe even only a little) of it back but I'm not paying anything out of my cold hard cash in my account. They're investing the money and whether that money makes a profit or a loss I still get my interest. I pay commission on insurance policies when I take them out why would I expect the bank to not take a 'commission' on making me a little bit extra dosh. Can't have it all for nothing can ya ?

mackers8923

euronorris wrote: »

The cost isn't zero. That's not correct.

The computers cost money, the programming costs money and the maintenance costs money.

There is a cost involved, but it is far less than the charges imposed. I think it has been estimated at around 2.50.

I did really say nothing but when you compare £2.50 to £38 a time then it is literally nothing...

mackers8923

Biskit wrote: »

"You're not receiving 'free banking'. The interest your money earns the bank is higher than what they pay you. Trust me, you pay for your services one way or the other."

That may be so but it's not physically costing me anything - they're taking their cut of the money they make with my money and giving me (maybe even only a little) of it back but I'm not paying anything out of my cold hard cash in my account. They're investing the money and whether that money makes a profit or a loss I still get my interest. I pay commission on insurance policies when I take them out why would I expect the bank to not take a 'commission' on making me a little bit extra dosh. Can't have it all for nothing can ya ?

Exactly I think most people would easily accept that they have to pay for the service they get from their bank, I pay my own £8 for this I get a few bits and bobs for which I can justify the money.

One shoe can't fit all but in the instance of charges why is it they charge only £15 (Est) when they pay something but charge you £38 (Est) when they don't pay the thing for you. Ummmm one to think about

I repeat what I said in one of my earlier posts, if the fees were reasonable and justified then everyday joe bloggs would accept it and pay it. It is the simple truth that because they have torn the !!!! out of it that they have been in court for so long.

I'm actually looking forward to the next stages, this is far from over.

euronorris

Biskit wrote: »

"You're not receiving 'free banking'. The interest your money earns the bank is higher than what they pay you. Trust me, you pay for your services one way or the other."

That may be so but it's not physically costing me anything - they're taking their cut of the money they make with my money and giving me (maybe even only a little) of it back but I'm not paying anything out of my cold hard cash in my account. They're investing the money and whether that money makes a profit or a loss I still get my interest. I pay commission on insurance policies when I take them out why would I expect the bank to not take a 'commission' on making me a little bit extra dosh. Can't have it all for nothing can ya ?

They may not be taking it directly, but it cannot be described as free.

And you will most likely find that if they started to apply a standard charge for all for their banking services, then the amount of interest applied to an in credit current account would increase.

That's what they do here, I can't see why they can't in the UK.

And the charge for banking here is EUR 8.95 per quarter! It's such a small amount. We're not talking 10-15 per month here.

nickro59

mramra wrote: »

Why? You helped yourself to money that isn't yours. Why shouldn't the bank charge you whatever it feels is fair?

If you came around to my house and took £10 out of my wallet I would be livid. I wouldn't just want the £10 back, I would expect further consequences for your actions.

Nobody "helped themself" to any money.Surely it's the banks choice whether or not to pay the DD, they could decline the payment, but unfortunately most of them pay it then "help themself" to £35 of the account holders money for doing so. So who really is "helping themselves" to the money?