Let's get real - who is paying for this prolifragacy?

Gregstac

Boredatwork wrote: »

So if i left my house unlocked and you walked in an emptied it, that would not be theft?

I think you might find your insurance company would not want to admit it as theft

aparker35

What about when the boot is on the other foot? The banks won't accept that they should be charged even when they admit that they have been at fault. They don't even want to refund charges that they have made as a result of their fault.

Banks are always happy to quote terms and conditions when it's in their favour but make it extremely difficult for customers to make claims on them and then drag their heels in making any repayments. As a result of today's judgements customers should also be able to make punitive charges on the banks when they are in the wrong. If the banks had to pay £30 or more every time they make a mistake how much would that cost them?

Isn't there something in the law of contract that says rules that apply to one party should also apply to the other?

Charlie94

justjohn wrote: »

I been there many moons ago..£1000 over the overdraft and 300 pound in charges. The bank extended my overdraft too compensate for it after a meeting with them.

I bust my backside and paid it off. All run up by my ex...all cards.cheque books destroyed so the hole did not get any deeper

Its called managing money and debt

This is brilliant , your berating people for not taking personal responsibility for thier debt and then go on to blame your ex for yours! :rotfl:

You really should have demonstrated better financial judgement and not shared an account with such a 'profligate' person.

ganonman

Boredatwork wrote: »

So if i left my house unlocked and you walked in an emptied it, that would not be theft?

You are not 'letting' me take your stuff though are you? You're just leaving your house open accidently.:rotfl:

A bank can easily make it so you cannot go over your limit, but that would not be in their interests, it's no accident. They choose to allow you to go over your limit, so much so that they have a secondary limit that they will allow you to get to before declining your requests for funds, but they will still charge you for any funds you take before you get to it.

timmmers

aparker35 wrote: »

What about when the boot is on the other foot? The banks won't accept that they should be charged even when they admit that they have been at fault. They don't even want to refund charges that they have made as a result of their fault.

Banks are always happy to quote terms and conditions when it's in their favour but make it extremely difficult for customers to make claims on them and then drag their heels in making any repayments. As a result of today's judgements customers should also be able to make punitive charges on the banks when they are in the wrong. If the banks had to pay £30 or more every time they make a mistake how much would that cost them?

Isn't there something in the law of contract that says rules that apply to one party should also apply to the other?

Didn't some guy charge them for writing about their errors once ?

As for the managing money b*llocks....that's fine if you have pots of money and can pop down and whack a few hundred into your A/C ....to cover the charges and the OD. What if you are unemplyed living off 65 quid a week and FORCED to have a bank A.C due to them phasing out giros...one day you check your balance, you have 30 quid and withdraw it. Your last 30 quid BTW. Then the next time you get your princely fortune paid in you fnd that the bank charged you 35 quid for going 2 quid over (the balance you saw wasn't accurate, the ATM woudn't print a statement or accurate balance and one purchase on your debit card hadn't been processed yet). Instead of 65 quid to live on...you now have 30 assuming that they only charged you once. Oh..look....now that DD you thought was fine ..it's not paid as the bank removed 30 quid and there isn't enough...and drat, another charge...and you can't manage your OD because basic ACs don't have one. You're screwed.

My fully grown 6ft tall mate came to my house in tears a few weeks ago having just had this happen to him...full of shame for having to ask to borrow a few quid for food and to honour his rent. Heartbreaking to have to see that. I'm anticipating some smartass saying he should get a job...I'd love to see them say that to him ...he visits the JC every single day hoping to be first to see some new position.

t

ganonman

justjohn wrote: »

So if i order 20 cheque books and write cheques for the next 1 year with no money in the account its the banks fault??

same thing init???

Not really, no.

Don't twist my words to cover something that is blantant fraud. :rolleyes: You know that's not what I meant (at least I hope you do).

Let's stay with the mainstream examples and not clutch at straws to get a clever post.

justjohn

Charlie94 wrote: »

This is brilliant , your berating people for not taking personal responsibility for thier debt and then go on to blame your ex for yours! :rotfl:

You really should have demonstrated better financial judgement and not shared an account with such a 'profligate' person.

You may be joking (unsure??) but I actually completely agree with you. We had a joint account and she 'handled' all the bills and bank 'stuff'. I didn't find out 'WE' were in trouble until I stumbled on a letter from the bank asking us to surrender all our cards and cheque books!

I went straight to the bank and had a meeting with the bank manager. Handed back all the cards etc...and worked hard at paying off the debt she had run up.

Most importantly I learnt from it!! I took control of the finances and she only got to spend what I gave her. It has never happened again. I firmly believe if she had taken the action that I did as soon as she got the 'first' letter it could have been sorted out a lot easier. I don't blame the bank at all, even though a third of the debt I eventually paid off was down to bank charges....it just made me realise I would never allow it to happen again.

No one to blame but myself....(and her obviously).

ganonman

I just reread my post(s), makes me sound really off.

I'm not trying to some across as that.

Basically, I'm not in direct opposition to the charges issue, as it is not all black and white.

What I do completely disagree with though, is people calling people that are not good with their finances 'thieves'. That is just offensive.

justjohn

ganonman wrote: »

Not really, no.

Don't twist my words to cover something that is blantant fraud. :rolleyes: You know that's not what I meant (at least I hope you do).

Let's stay with the mainstream examples and not clutch at straws to get a clever post.

If you are aware a DD will mak your bank overdrawn then it is the exact same. And you should be aware.

justjohn

timmmers wrote: »

one day you check your balance, you have 30 quid and withdraw it. Your last 30 quid BTW. Then the next time you get your princely fortune paid in you fnd that the bank charged you 35 quid for going 2 quid over (the balance you saw wasn't accurate, the ATM woudn't print a statement or accurate balance and one purchase on your debit card hadn't been processed yet).
t

Yes I am sure that was heartbreaking...however it is still mismanagement of money...your mate should have been on top of what payments had and had not gone out of his account. If there was any doubt he should have not have withdrawn the entire balance.

The bank issues statements, has mini statements available at ATM machines, has online banking and phone banking or you could always do what my mum does, and write down your balance in a book and EVERYTHING that is going out, and then ticks it off once it has ACTUALLY gone out. Therefore knowing EXACTLY how much money she needs to leave in the account.

I would have thought that living on such a tight budget and knowing (as everyone does) about bank charges you would be EXTRA careful to not stray into the red.