MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

custardy

liam8282 wrote: »

I am a customer of Yorkshire Bank, which is owned by National Australia Group.

When the bank charges case started, National Australia scrapped most bank charges in other countries such as Australia, New Zealand... but not the UK.

Not a wonder really, it is not like anybody in the UK would do anything about it.

What about all the politicians who chirped in there piece, I wonder what they have got to say about things now?!

but in Oz most accounts are fee paying so not a direct comparison

berkshirelady

mramra wrote: »

Alternatively, pay more attention so that you don't go overdrawn again thus avoiding the charge that is clearly stated in Lloyds T&Cs that you agreed to when you opened the account.

Oooh I do pay attention, thanks, mum.

if Lloyds, each time I make a payment to reduce what I owe, didn't keep arbitrarily reducing my OD limit to a level whereby as soon as the monthly interest is applied, it busts the limit, so that they can apply a penalty charge, then refuse to discuss it, ad infinitum, I might have paid it all off by now. And ignoring me when I try to warn of loss of earnings due to sick leave caused by disability recognised under the DDA isn't helpful either. (I didn't want to bring that up really, seeing as some of the people on here consider that to be some sort of 'sob' story, but it is relevant to my circumstances).

Would you like some sausages?

imapoorstudent

The_White_Horse wrote: »

not really. i wouldn't have expected the supreme court to consist of a load of ignorant chavs with massive debts.

Maybe it should consist of professional !!!!s, like you. How much are professional !!!!s paid nowadays, so I can see where you fall on the poor-rich spectrum?

KellyB

I'm absolutely appalled.

Human nature at its worst.

The behaviour of some people on here is disgusting.
Gloating and goading, trolling and general nastiness isn't pleasant. These are real people here. Most of which, through no fault of their own (yes, really), have been disadvantaged because of the high penalty fees.
No one is saying that fees shouldn't be charged. People are saying they should be fair.

To the smug people: remember - what goes around, comes around. You or someone you love could very well be in a similar situation to hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people, one day. How would you feel about the unthoughtful comments made?
Too many people forget that there are real people behind the screenname. Real people, real circumstances. They come here for help, support, understanding. Not abuse, smugness and an holier-than-thou attitude.

That is all.

DataWraith

DRAW OUT YOUR CASH!

It's a simple as that, yes the banks have reduced some charges only to save face, but in the end they've won, no matter how much we whine or hurl insults at each other here it doesn't help us much.
I was owed over £1000 by the Halifax which I'm probably not going to see now, so I'd recommend that we as the paying public show our displeasure at the banks and deny them the opportunity of making any more charges from us, pay your bills ontime then draw out the rest of your money so they can't use it. As soon as you get paid , look to move your money from them to your mattress,

PadiP

philatio wrote: »

I love it how the scenario of the jobless, single parent who can't find 50p for the gas meter or feed the 5 kids.. is the one everybody is spouting here.

Wake up!

99% of the people fighting these charges are paid a decent wage.. spend it all on beer, fags, DVDs and clubbing and then expect to be able to spend money they don't have.. for free.. until the next pay day.

Whether the charges are 'fair' or not is irrelevant. The banks clearly publish their charges and fees. You sign up for an account so you agree to those fees. End of.

And no.. I'm not a banker (!).. I just have the basic intelligence to be able to manage my own finances.

Please live in the real world. Many people are working part time on pretty poor (minimum wage) pay, or are unemployed. No-one has ever suggested that people should not pay the bank's costs of dealing with a refused DD or cheque, just that the amount the banks charge is excessive. Many people's finances are precarious, and whilst there are some who fall into the category of being irresponsible, the majority are just hard working folk trying to pay their way but are being screwed by the system. Even if you do try to manage your finances sensibly, and try to arrange a DD for a particular date, the payee often asks for it a couple of days early, maybe before someone's salary has gone in - thus generating charges. This is bad enough if it's one charge, but if it's several, it mounts up, and this is very hard even if you earn a decent amount. Many many people are still only two pay packets away from the street.

Big_Daft_Lad

KellyB wrote: »

I'm absolutely appalled.

Human nature at its worst.

The behaviour of some people on here is disgusting.
Gloating and goading, trolling and general nastiness isn't pleasant. These are real people here. Most of which, through no fault of their own (yes, really), have been disadvantaged because of the high penalty fees.
No one is saying that fees shouldn't be charged. People are saying they should be fair.

To the smug people: remember - what goes around, comes around. You or someone you love could very well be in a similar situation to hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people, one day. How would you feel about the unthoughtful comments made?
Too many people forget that there are real people behind the screenname. Real people, real circumstances. They come here for help, support, understanding. Not abuse, smugness and an holier-than-thou attitude.

That is all.

This sums it up perfectly. Hopefully the holier than thou club can now move on - preferably elsewhere?

marcharrison1979

There's no such thing as a nice banker, i have a friend who works for a bank and he's a right !!!! head, i'm kick the !!!! out of him if he wasn't my friend.
Message to all you bank scum! i hope you all die horrible deaths.
Cheers!
xxxxxx

ailsajayne29

The_White_Horse wrote: »

not really. i wouldn't have expected the supreme court to consist of a load of ignorant chavs with massive debts.

wow.... can i just point out I was hoping to reclaim £3000 of bank charges.....

I am a professional with a university degree, from a middle class background, I work in a profession that doesn't pay very well but i do it so im not on the dole, I had a higher paid jb but got made redundant seeing as the country's economoy went to the dogs last year.... How dare you say that people trying to reclaim are chavs...... In fact this whole sitatuion makes me wish i hadnt bothered to get a job and had just signed on, my rent would be paid for and id be rolling in all kinds of credits and cash.... prob with more spare cash than i have no as I would not be expected to repay any of my cc's until i found work!!!

I suggest you are the ignorant one

DMC65

EABowden wrote: »

Whilst I sympathise wholeheartedly with people in that position, it does not make sense to punish the majority of people that run their accounts properly. This is one of the reasons this country has gone down the dumper in the last few years, because people have lost all sense of personal responsibility.

In America you are charged every time you use a cash point. Losing £1 or more every time you use the bank adds up to hundreds of pounds in charges just for using cashpoints over a year. That's what would happen if banks were not allowed to punish people that abused their accounts. Is that what you'd like to see here?

I thought not.

At least it would be fairer than the system we have at present.

Do you think it's OK to charge £30 - £40 for a computer generated letter or an online notice to tell you that they have refused to pay your direct debit, and then offer freebies (including cash in some cases) to customers that pay in £1000 or more a month.

There are some amount of sanctimonious !!!!! in this country.