MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

MillaJoJo

Badster wrote: »

Delighted with the result on the Bank charges!! If the banks reduce their fees they would just charge fees to everybody for the privlidge of :jhaving an account. Why should I have to subsidise the people who cannot manage their finances and live within their means?
I've got a good idea-stay within your overdraft and you wont get charged at all!

Yes! Absolutely right.

Don't go over your overdraft arrangment and then let everyone pay for their banking! I'm all for that!

You don't mind the banks making profit off those in desperate situations as long as you don't have to pay for the service.

If none of us went over, and no one got charged you would have to pay. So which way do you want it?

Some people just don't think things through when they post.

raider

Janeyc wrote: »

Oh for goodness sake! Write a book, you never know it may be a best seller! Or at least it will act as a little reminder to yourself of how clever you are! I take it you haven't been made redundant within the last couple of years! where is your compassion?

Ignorance is bliss I guess.

orc_2

Here is a press release from the British Banking Assoc

http://www.bba.org.uk/bba/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=145&a=16922

Supreme Court Statement


25/11/2009


The Supreme Court has today confirmed that the Banks' unarranged overdraft charges are an important part of current account services which the Banks provide to their customers and that the amount of those charges is not assessable for fairness.


The Banks acknowledge the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court to allow their appeal in respect of these charges. We recognise this issue has been of real concern to a large number of our customers and we are pleased that this decision now brings clarity for all parties.
The Banks will work with the regulators to ensure that the outstanding customer complaints are brought to a swift conclusion. We will also continue to work together with the OFT in connection with its on-going Market study.
Please refer to the BBA's and individual Banks' websites for further information.
For further information, please contact:
BBA Press Office (020 7216 8989 )
Out of hours (020 7216 8888 )

LeGrandThommo

DaveO wrote: »

Yes. Unforeseen circumstances such as your employer being late with paying your salary into your account.

Even if people stay in credit normally not everyone has enough money to cover such an eventuality and such things do happen.

Most of my direct debits are timed to go off after my wage arrives and if it was late I am OK as savings would cover it and be transferred but not everyone is in that position.

As far as the bank is concerned salary being paid late into your account meaning direct debits or other payments take you overdrawn is no excuse not to be charged.

This is so obvious how on earth did you not think of it?

Dave

If your employer pays you late, your are entitled to claim any charges from your employer. It is hardly the bank's fault (unless you work for that bank of course!)

lewis07

The banks are profiteering from the poor. how can that ever be legal.

People in a financially stable position dont fall into the realms of overdrafts.

and if they do they have the money to re-balance there accounts.

THE BANKS CHARGE THOSE WHO ARE UNABLE TO REBALANCE THERE ACCOUNTS AND COMPOUND THAT CHANCE AGAIN AND AGAIN, MONTH ON MONTH.

This means the poorer you are, the less likely you are to re-balance your account and the more you are penalised.

Im one of those who were taken passed my'authorised overdraft' by the bank and had charges put on charges and faced an entire unauthorised overdraft of only bank charges!!! I have forced into losing my business, home all due to the compounded bank charges they applied.

..think about it.

jonpnash

LATWTTB wrote: »

I think the ruling is hilarious and absolutely just. The banks are a business. They are in the business of making money. Any other business will charge you for their service/products-why shouldn't the banks? "But they are not fair charges" I hear all you lot cry. Well I paid £3.50 for a bottle of water in London t'other day and I am pretty sure that it did not cost the producer or the retailer that much to supply it to me. I still paid it because I was thirsty and that is the going rate in that particular shop....I didn't have to buy it....see where I am going with this???
The vast majority of bank customers abide by the rules and are never charged a penny even though the bank provides them

What a smug basket.

lauraloo111

I cant believe this has happened! I had only just sent a letter out to my bank to try and reclaim £2756 under the financial hardship criteria which would have arrived with them this morning. It would have been done sooner if I hadnt been waiting so long for my statements!!

Hopefully there is still another way for us to get our money back.

I would say there were most definately some back handers going on or they have never had any charges themselves the realise how unfair the charges actually are!

Lets just all keep our fingers crossed and hope that there may be a glimmer of light at the end of a very long dark tunnel!

berkshirelady

well, hello to the smug people who are posting on here and lecturing the rest of us. I'm soooo profligate with my money, last night (as usual) I went on a 'yellow label use by same day' bargain hunt in my local Co-op and got 3 packs of sausages (were £2.59 a pack) for the princely sum of 20p a pack. I had planned to cook them up in to a sausage casserole to last me for the rest of the week.

However, I now think it would be well worth the 60p I spent to force feed them, uncooked, to Lord Phillips, and then tell him I could force feed him another 172 packs of sausages if I hadn't been charged £35 AGAIN by Lloyds.

Big_Daft_Lad

The only positive thing that will come out of this now is the establishment of terms which are fairer to the customer going forwards - if we are lucky. Those of us who have outstanding claims can wave goodbye to the money. There may be a bit of thrashing around by the OfT about approaching this from a different angle but the game's up now, I'm afraid. The banks have got the upper hand now and they will not lose the advantage again.

BankReclaimRebel

LeGrandThommo wrote: »

Don't you think they would have done that already? The route they took was hardly the easy option!

This was the banks route, not the OFT's. They were forced down this route when they challenged the banks.

I think they will still look into this as they have already done so with the Credit Card industry.