MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

dirtydavey

I got sick of arguing with the 3 or 4 people that are telling us that we expect a free ride. That we are stealing. That we should be more carfull with our money. That we are going to end free banking.

I bank with RBS and get told by the bank that I should take more care of my finances if I dont wnat to get charged. What a check, when I am in creidy what have they been doing with my money? Not taking care of it. They should know that some times situatiuons are chucked at you that you dont expect and you end up spending money that you dont have.

But when I do so, I cant turn to my good friend Mr Brown to help me out. I instead get charged 35 quid for being 1p over drawn.

Why must I pay for the banks mistakes? Will mr Brown be charging teh banks £35 quid a pop for every transaction they make when in the red.

I dont want free banking to end. But it would also make more sence if banking was paid for fairly by all. Not just by some. (if that be people in the red or the black)

I am sure that some of you are enjoying talking down to people about how to look after there money and thinking you know it all. But you have no idea what others are going though. You have no idea why people got into this situation or why they cant get out. Read though the boards. Talk of people losing a loved one, or losing a job, or becoming disabled. Who are you to judge.

People come here to get them selfs out of debt. Cant you see that the fact people are here trying so hard to get out of debt means they are not dumb and foolish. That they are trying to fix the situation.

Many people today have lost the only chance they had of getting them self out of debt and may never do so now. Have they not suffered enough with out you telling them its there fault. Or are you just enjoying it?

mramra

The_White_Horse wrote: »

yeah, because they get the 100 overdraft and spend it on nonsense. then it is gone.

This is the thing, too many people using their authorised overdraft as if it were disposable income rather than there for emergencies. Hence when an emergency occurs the next step is into an unauthorised overdraft.

The_White_Horse

Charlie94 wrote: »

It has absoloutely nothing to do with the entitlement attitude! This court judgment was on an issue of fairness. Even before the decision went to court the banks judging from thier payouts agreed that their charges were not fair.

In the past you could not withdraw money if you hit your overdraft. The banks however realised that they could make money out of people who mistakenly went over their limit. Bank overdraft charges have been a huge success for banks allowing them to capitlise on thier customers mistakes or hardship. Its as if they want to tempt you with the money and then slap your hand when you take it. If they were so worried about people going over their overdraft why not say when you hit your limit that is it, you can't have any more. The reason they don't is there a huge amount of money to be made from this.

i agree 100%. If you have 50 quid and you want to buy something for 60 quid - it should just decline. the end.

the same with a dd. if no money, decline it. then you can sort it out with supplier.

BUT. that isn't how it works and the same scenario can be established if you are careful and keep up with what is in there. You just have to look every day.

levineg10

I am thrilled that the banks have won - it means fee free banking for those in credit will continue.

Yes I have always been in credit with the bank and have never had any debts. I have never had a bank charge in my life.

Great result, thank you Supreme Court.

Stephenbw

PadiP wrote: »

Which probably means that the credit card charges are 'pooled' so those of us who pay by cash are subsidising those who pay by credit card.

Not really because it is cheaper for the shop to process credit card payments than the manpower, security, and banking costs involved processing cash.

Those of us who pay by card are subsidising those who pay by cash

johnd72

The_Hallowed_Way wrote: »

That depends on whose tongue is in whose cheeks.

didn't think this was that sort of site........but it lifts the tension i suppose???

The_Hallowed_Way

johnd72 wrote: »

didn't think this was that sort of site........but it lifts the tension i suppose???

Actually these days it's more likely to get me banned!

berkshirelady

from BBC News...
Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive Stephen Hester has warned there is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to bank charges for customers

From the photo of him on the BBC website, I wonder if his double chin is the result of plenty of tax payer-funded schmoozing?! I feel an FOI request to RBS coming on...'how many lunches has Stephen Hester claimed on expenses in the last 12 months'

Stephenbw

mramra wrote: »

This is the thing, too many people using their authorised overdraft as if it were disposable income rather than there for emergencies. Hence when an emergency occurs the next step is into an unauthorised overdraft.

This is exactly what used to happen to me when I was young and foolish with my money.

mramra

berkshirelady wrote: »

from BBC News...
Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive Stephen Hester has warned there is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to bank charges for customers

From the photo of him on the BBC website, I wonder if his double chin is the result of plenty of tax payer-funded schmoozing?! I feel an FOI request to RBS coming on...'how many lunches has Stephen Hester claimed on expenses in the last 12 months'

Or he's been force-fed too many cheap sausages! :rotfl: