Bank Charges - Banks Win!

Eyeballs_2

Who really cares if we get free banking or not, I am happy to pay for my banking as long as I get decent service which now I rarely Do.

I am even happy to pay a charge for going over my agreed overdraft, if it was my fault. I think the point most people are trying make are bank charges for this is far too excessive and completely unjustified, it costs the banks pence for you going over but yet they see it best to charge you anything between £12-£35. That is a total disgrace, think I have gone over twice in my life and was shocked by this charge, I complained and got this fee refunded, I would however been willing to pay something.

The bank informed me that they charge people such amount to detour them from doing it again, which sounds fair enough but lets be honest it will only keep these people in a cycle they can't get out of. It’s not the charge that should be questioned, it’s the amount

As to these people telling others that this is a good thing because they have been fortunate in life to save some money up should take a long hard look at themselves and have some compassion for others, it's not always caused by them and its not always caused by spending their money on shoes etc

Be honest, what would be a good compromise. I would imagine that could be discussed forever too

Lokolo

Eyeballs wrote: »

Who really cares if we get free banking or not, I am happy to pay for my banking as long as I get decent service which now I rarely Do.

I am even happy to pay a charge for going over my agreed overdraft, if it was my fault. I think the point most people are trying make are bank charges for this is far too excessive and completely unjustified, it costs the banks pence for you going over but yet they see it best to charge you anything between £12-£35. That is a total disgrace, think I have gone over twice in my life and was shocked by this charge, I complained and got this fee refunded, I would however been willing to pay something.

The bank informed me that they charge people such amount to detour them from doing it again, which sounds fair enough but lets be honest it will only keep these people in a cycle they can't get out of. It’s not the charge that should be questioned, it’s the amount

As to these people telling others that this is a good thing because they have been fortunate in life to save some money up should take a long hard look at themselves and have some compassion for others, it's not always caused by them and its not always caused by spending their money on shoes etc

Be honest, what would be a good compromise. I would imagine that could be discussed forever too

So you think if we start paying for bank accounts we will get a better service?

And you really think people get charged due to 'bad luck'? 90% of the time it's due to people who are financially incompetent. I agree, in some cases, such as ill health, it can be, but this is why you should save money for these circumstances.

Very very very few people start their working life in debt. So people can easily start their working life, for the first couple of years, start a savings account whereby you can save a lot of your salary incase circumstances do change.

However, people do not do this, then when they end up being made redundant, sacked, lose their jobs for whatever reason, they then still use their cards and then complain when they are charged excessively!

duckbrfc

Depressing. The banks just squeeze and squeeze and squeeze. Interest rates are at an all-time low, yet loans remain around 8%apr. Then when it all goes wrong they know they'll be bailed out by the public as they are too big to let go to the wall. It's all very depressing, if you ask me.

Eyeballs_2

No, I said as long as we get decent service. I am happy if it is free or not. So please do not twist my words

I'm also not in debt and very fortunate for this

So these poor people lose there jobs and can't find anything for months or even years thanks mainly to the bank and the greediness the whole country comes to a grinding halt and you say, well it's your own fault for not saving when you had the chance?

Some people cannot save if they are low earners and live on the breadline

What are these people supposed to do exactly, they have to live somehow and the banks do not help as usual by making it worse by charging excessive fees

Charge yes, but make it reasonable. Alternatively, even go crazy and try to help people out

fermi

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

Link: Bank charges: the phoenix from the flames

Link: Bank charges Q&A: Door reopened for reclaimers?

Gareth56

I'm old enough to remember when banks had managers and qualified bank staff rather than the glorified checkout assistants who are just there to sell different financial products today. If you needed any help or assistance with your account you just went into the bank and either spoke to the manager or the deputy bank manager and that was it unlike today when you have to speak to someone thousands of miles away just to organise an overdraft.

I very much doubt that paying for a bank account will bring back the days when banks were banks, rather we will be stuck with the impersonal and target driven money shops which just operate as depositories of our money.

Lokolo

Eyeballs wrote: »

No, I said as long as we get decent service. I am happy if it is free or not. So please do not twist my words

I'm also not in debt and very fortunate for this

So these poor people lose there jobs and can't find anything for months or even years thanks mainly to the bank and the greediness the whole country comes to a grinding halt and you say, well it's your own fault for not saving when you had the chance?

Some people cannot save if they are low earners and live on the breadline

What are these people supposed to do exactly, they have to live somehow and the banks do not help as usual by making it worse by charging excessive fees

Charge yes, but make it reasonable. Alternatively, even go crazy and try to help people out

1) I didn't twist your words. I said paying for bank accounts isn't going to change the poor service, so why should we have to pay for service that isn't going to be good anyway?

2) I am on £15k. I manage to save £400-£500 a month from a takehome of £1,000. So don't give me that 'oh the poor can't save' carp.

3) They have choices to live. Have you not heard of a loan? Or authorised overdraft?

zierisaver

duckbrfc wrote: »

Depressing. The banks just squeeze and squeeze and squeeze. Interest rates are at an all-time low, yet loans remain around 8%apr. Then when it all goes wrong they know they'll be bailed out by the public as they are too big to let go to the wall. It's all very depressing, if you ask me.

Agreed. Thoroughly predictable judgement and thoroughly depressing. :mad:

dickydonkin

never-in-doubt wrote: »

I was going to tear your post apart and answer accordingly but can't be arsed to be honest! The points though are as follows:

1. I am anti banks - simple. Nothing will change that.
2. Whoopee you had insurance! Unfortunately those that usually need loans and loads of credit cannot afford insurance as well so they do not have it. Each to their own! That does not mean that you are right and they are wrong - its just the way the cookie crumbles and some people (on the breadline) try to do anything to get by and borrowing a lot (omitting insurance) is somethimes the only way.
3. I am entitled to wish all I want thanks, so are you! It was a tongue in cheek comment supposed to put them back to reality - i.e. who the bloody hell do they think they are acting high and mighty, yea - !!!!!! happens and as a result peoples circumstances change - that is not a crime. No need for smart !!!!!! though is there?
4. The reality is that the banks think they have won, now more is coming to light after the initial con verdict....


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Tear it apart as you wish - I will respond accordingly, but I do not think you have much to criticise really.

I was responding to your 'tongue in cheek' post wishing that people lost their jobs, got into debt etc etc. and I was also explaining my situation when my wife and I who were both working for the same company were made redundant.

I have to concede that I was fortunate prior to my redundancy, however, a lot of that was due to my prudence - whoopee me eh!

For someone who 'could not be arsed' to respond, your 1,022 character response seeems to contradict that statement.

I also do not like banks, but I don't get irrational and neurotic over them and I don't respond to rational postings in a frenzied manner.

As my earlier post implied, it can eat you up and muddle your mind - it would seem that has already occurred.

As someone has correctly pointed out earlier in this thread, you seem to have issues!

Eyeballs_2

Lokolo wrote: »

1) I didn't twist your words. I said paying for bank accounts isn't going to change the poor service, so why should we have to pay for service that isn't going to be good anyway?

2) I am on £15k. I manage to save £400-£500 a month from a takehome of £1,000. So don't give me that 'oh the poor can't save' carp.

3) They have choices to live. Have you not heard of a loan? Or authorised overdraft?

Fair enough, are you single, Live in a cheap area or with your parents, no kids etc,on that wage? Probably

Like i say, i don't care about free banking or paying for it. i don't think that's the issue here

i see your way out of it though, very clever, We all know the answer now. Lets all get a bank loan

Love it