We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
protest march
Comments
-
-
Now you know how your bank felt when you took their money without authorisation.
Yet no money went out... The banks don't pay your DD if it bounces do they so how have the people stole money from them exactly?
Head out of @rse please. Stop being so high and mightly over it all. If you ever run into debt, you would be s**t on the same as us poor people have.
It's blatant profiteering of the poor to fund the rich.
If a roofer charged £700 for a £100 job, you would brand him a cowboy. How exactly is this any different from the banks?
Oh this is fun. Between last night and today I must have pointed these simple facts out hundreds of times!!! I'm getting bored of repeating myself!
(This thread is top on google if you type in the profiteering part!)0 -
mr.brightside87 wrote: »Yet no money went out... The banks don't pay your DD if it bounces do they so how have the people stole money from them exactly?
Head out of @rse please. Stop being so high and mightly over it all. If you ever run into debt, you would be s**t on the same as us poor people have.
It's blatant profiteering of the poor to fund the rich.
If a roofer charged £700 for a £100 job, you would brand him a cowboy. How exactly is this any different from the banks?
Oh this is fun. Between last night and today I must have pointed these simple facts out hundreds of times!!! I'm getting bored of repeating myself!
In your direct debit example, you attempted to take more money than you had in available authorised funds. It's the equivalent of trying to pickpocket someone and getting caught with your hand in their pocket.
The high charges for going into unauthorised arrears are there to act as a deterrent from taking money without approval. The charge is not meant to simply cover the cost of sending a letter.
Between last night and today I must have pointed these simple facts out hundreds of times!!! I'm getting bored of repeating myself!0 -
mr.brightside87 wrote: »Yet no money went out... The banks don't pay your DD if it bounces do they so how have the people stole money from them exactly?
Head out of @rse please. Stop being so high and mightly over it all. If you ever run into debt, you would be s**t on the same as us poor people have.
It's blatant profiteering of the poor to fund the rich.
If a roofer charged £700 for a £100 job, you would brand him a cowboy. How exactly is this any different from the banks?
Oh this is fun. Between last night and today I must have pointed these simple facts out hundreds of times!!! I'm getting bored of repeating myself!
(This thread is top on google if you type in the profiteering part!)
Keep repeating yourself, it's 100% accurate and spot on.0 -
In your direct debit example, you attempted to take more money than you had in available authorised funds. It's the equivalent of trying to pickpocket someone and getting caught with your hand in their pocket.
The high charges for going into unauthorised arrears are there to act as a deterrent from taking money without approval. The charge is not meant to simply cover the cost of sending a letter.
Between last night and today I must have pointed these simple facts out hundreds of times!!! I'm getting bored of repeating myself!
So if they take money a week earlier and I'm not expecting it, it's my fault?
The fact that NO MONEY goes from the bank and the bank doesn't even pay for the DD equates to theft.
Then when I question it, the bank refuses to do anything, takes my card and sends me no notification... That's my fault is it?
Then you get the high charges which you can't pay back... £35 for something that is £2 at the most is awfully steep. If they act as a deterrent, that is indeed a penalty and I think that's one of the things the OFT were trying to prove...
There are several reasons for going into debt. I have just listed 2 of them!
The majority of bank charges come from unpaid DD's which has a domino effect on the next month... And the next month... And the next month until you are up to your eyeballs in debt. If this is the case then why do the banks have a system that allows companies to try and take direct debits out when there is no money?
It all boils down to a never ending cycle of income. Unethical and unjust.
Like I said, if a roofer did a job and paid 7 times as much, you would brand him a cowboy. Why is this any different from what the banks are doing? Answer me in full! I just think you are ashamed to admit that you are wrong to someone who knows what he is talking about and doesn't swear or insult every other letter.0 -
mr.brightside87 wrote: »I just think you are ashamed to admit that you are wrong to someone who knows what he is talking about and doesn't swear or insult every other letter.
I don't recall swearing once. You on the other hand...mr.brightside87 wrote: »Head out of @rse please. Stop being so high and mightly over it all. If you ever run into debt, you would be s**t on the same as us poor people have.
:T0 -
The high charges for going into unauthorised arrears are there to act as a deterrent from taking money without approval. The charge is not meant to simply cover the cost of sending a letter.
So where does everyone sign to say they agree to that? Perhaps you could point out one financial institution which makes a statement to that effect? Leafing through one bank's T&Cs for a current account, I see no mention of a 'deterrent'.
If you have pointed this out 'hundreds of times' then you have misled a great many people. With the greatest respect, perhaps you should understand the issue at hand before making ill-conceived comments on it.0 -
I do find it incredible that even on a thread that is about organising a march to London and not actaully about discussing the issue of bank charges the people that celebrated yesterdays decision still can't resist posting.
I really hope I never in my lifetime get to the point where I celebrate the fact that people have lost money to financial institutions. You must be such bitter people.
Before you start people in debt to the bank do not subsidise those in credit. Thats not the way banking works. Banks make a profit out of people in debt! otherwise they would n't allow it to happen!
Free banking would have continued if the banks had lost yesterday. In fact I would says its more likely free banking will stop now as the banks realise they can get away with anything. As the Guardian said today ' it must leave some wondering whether it is the banking industry that has taken over the state rather than the other way round'0 -
C_Mababejive wrote: »Yes lets...
The address of the MSE office is here,
MoneySavingExpert.com, Shepherds Studios, Charecroft Way, London W14 0EH
They have been the main champions of this fools crusade surely..?
Note that i support and agree with the supreme court ruling.
Blah...blah...blah!!0 -
really is that so ,i have never been overdrawn so how do you work that they charged me £4000.00 in charges ?Now you know how your bank felt when you took their money without authorisation.missed direct debit charges,very odd,theres no pain so how come the big gain,i.e £39.00 for a letter0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards