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!
HELP! Standign Ordering sent me over overdraft! charged £70
Comments
-
So exactly the same situation. I only want the exact same small green ones (or any other individual sweet within the entire tin), yet my Tesco only sell them as a complete package.
The choice is to accept the bundle as offered or not accept it at all.
Honestly, Premier, it's not a very good analogy, I understand you came up with it yourself, which says a lot really ! If I had any spare time this morning I would quite happily rip it to shreds. However, as you haven't deemed it necessary to respond to my earlier point regarding terms and conditions I don't think I will bother anyway. Additionally, as you are apparantly a supporter of the banks policies of unfairness towards Consumers I personally don't think it would be right for me to waste any further time on you.
It's also incredibly bad manners for us to take over the OP's thread in this way. If you wish to discuss your Quality street problem then why not start another thread. I am sure there will be loads of interested posters....not !!!0 -
I think it's a very good anaology, even if I do say so myself!Honestly, Premier, it's not a very good analogy...
Feel free to argue against it should you disagree, but just attempting to dismiss it without reason is probably a reflection on just how good it actually is!
"The choice is to accept the bundle as offered or not accept it at all."
This is a public discussion board. I can choose what I wish to respond to and what I don't wish to respond to, just as you can.... However, as you haven't deemed it necessary to respond to my earlier point regarding terms and conditions I don't think I will bother anyway. ...
However, as you appear desperately keen on getting a response, what exactly was the question on terms and conditions you had?
If it was what are the terms & conditions agreed to, as I said they are usually found on the appropriate website.
You can also contact your bank if if are desperate for a copy - I'm sure they will supply them to you if asked.
Feel free to add me to your personal ignore list.... Additionally, as you are apparantly a supporter of the banks policies of unfairness towards Consumers I personally don't think it would be right for me to waste any further time on you.
However, it would be a poor discussion board if everyone had the same opinion wouldn't it and as a public discussion board, you can't control what others post, despite you clearly wishing to.
Ever thought of creating your own forum where you can have complete control over what others may or may not post?"Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
I don't follow your arguement at all
You probably haven't heard the anaology before ... it was all my original work
Surely you are not suggesting that if I go to any reatiler and buy the tin of QS at the full price, I can then expect that reatiler to issue a refund, partial or otherwise, because I am diabetic?
The analogy is about trying to equate it to the bank charges terms and conditions.
I want to give you a specific example, because I can't get the bank to explain it to me and it is not a personal account.
Please can you tell me the difference concisely between these two terms:
"Overdrafts agreed following an informal request
Debit balance is over existing formally arranged overdraft limit £4 per working day
Account is overdrawn with no formally arranged overdraft limit in place £8 per working day"
What would you say is the difference between term (a) and (b) in terms of what the charge is for? (on this one there is no hidden analogy and coming from a former bankworker, even I am baffled by these two terms). Is there something I am missing on both?0 -
natweststaffmember wrote: »The analogy is about trying to equate it to the bank charges terms and conditions. ...
Bearing in mind it was my analogy, as I said:
"The choice is to accept the bundle as offered or not accept it at all."
Oh, just noticed some posts have gone awol from this thread ... and I'm still able to post
"Now to trolling as a concept. .... Personally, I've always found it a little sad that people choose to spend such a large proportion of their lives in this way but they do, and we have to deal with it." - MSE Forum Manager 6th July 20100 -
Can I ask you for your opinion of the second part of the post please?Bearing in mind it was my analogy, as I said:
"The choice is to accept the bundle as offered or not accept it at all."
Oh, just noticed some posts have gone awol from this thread ... and I'm still able to post0 -
As its Christmas- please help yourselves!!!
(The green ones were taken.)
Please ignore those people who post on this forum who deliberately try to misinform you. Don't be bullied by them, don't be blamed by them. You know who I mean.
You come here for advice, help and support- thats what I and like minded others will try to do.0 -
Even Orc's confused, If one was to buy a tin of Quality Street and was provided with what he has pictured then one would be making a formal complaint !!
OK, I still think it's a crap analogy but will give you an answer. Quality Street are a luxury item and purchasing a tin is in no way, shape or form analogous to a PCA which is a central and essential component of 21st century life. PCAs allow for the regular payment of rent or a mortgage, utility bills, food, clothing, and a myriad of other essentials that are integral to modern life. The PCA represents the economic infrastructure by which our work, wages and savings are recycled into the economy. In these respects, the PCA is an essential utility.
Tins of Quality Street, whilst important in the overall scheme of things, do not even come close to being regarded as essential utilities.
So, I have no qualms in stating that if I only liked the green triangle Quality Street then I wouldn't purchase a tin of quality street unless my desire for the green triangle ones was so overwhelming that I considered it irrelevant that I would effectively be wasting my money by also paying for the other varieties within the tin.
Probably, the ideal scenario for a PCA would be more akin to a pick and mix selection. For example, Woolworths used to have various grades of pick and mix, you could go for a lower cost range or a more expensive one, the more expensive range usually containing better quality sweets. But within each of these ranges you were free to pick either a few of every variety on offer or all of one variety, whatever you wished.
IMO, it would be fair if a Consumer could pick and choose which services they wished as part of a complete package of services for their PCA at the time of entering into the contract and then to be able to vary that package of services throughout the duration of the contract as their financial requirements changed, they should also have all the various services properly explained and priced accordingly and fairly.
If the Consumer didn't want to have the bank consider a failure to have sufficient funds in a PCA as a request for an overdraft then they would be able to pick a PCA that simply would refuse the payment request if there were insufficient funds and not charge an excessive and potentially crippling amount for doing so. Most Consumers would be willing to pay for having such an account but only a fair and proportionate amount related to the actual work involved wrt the package of services that were specified, in the case of such an account as suggested I suspect the actual charge would be very small.
Similarly, if a Consumer wished to have a PCA that allowed money to automatically be switched between the PCA and a savings account as soon as the credit balance in the PCA rose above a set level and would also allow money to be automatically transferred from the savings account to the PCA to cover direct debit transactions or cheques then they should be expected to pay for the services provided, again provided it was fair and reasonable amount and again related to the work involved in running such an account.
The problem at the moment is that there is no choice, no opt in or out and no automatic flexibility provided whatsoever. PCA's are an unavoidable and essential utility in today’s world but even though the technology exists to allow the type of flexibility I am suggesting no bank seems keen to offer such a service to Consumers. It's not difficult to understand why, the banks have been screwing Customers for years and wish to continue doing so for as long as they possibly can. There is no incentive for them to be competitive with other PCA providers and no truly independent regulation to prevent them carrying out unfair practices.
Another package could perhaps be offered to those people who have the time and the ability to manage their financial affairs themselves, who are confident and have sufficient knowledge to allow them to maximise the use of their PCA account. But, I suggest that those people should not, in today’s world, expect to get the basic operational services for their PCA’s totally for free, which at the moment, by exploiting the system, it is quite possible to do. They too should pay a fair and reasonable charge for the basic operational services
The current charging system of the Banks is wholly wrong, clearly unfair by virtue of the regulations that supposedly cover such contracts, penalises the less financially able and lower income or benefit claiming Consumer and stagnates the necessity for the banks to take a more competitive approach to the nature of such accounts. Presently, there exists a huge imbalance in the system to the benefit of mainly the banks but also towards the more financially astute Consumer. Change is a long time overdue and even if, owing to the lack of courage of our Govt and the regulatory bodies, it turns out that there is no refund of historical charges, I will personally continue to campaign for change for the benefit of those Consumers who have suffered in the past and continue to suffer and will always continue to suffer unless change is bought about. I am happy to say that I am not alone in this desire, there are many thousands, probably millions of people who feel exactly the same.0 -
What, agreeing to a contract that you have no intention of abiding by?
Now who is being "really quite silly"?
In incurring any insufficient funds charge you are still abiding by the terms of the contract - as per Justice Smith's High Court declaration on penalties.
Your chocolate analogy is poor and there are 2 additional reasons to Big Budgie's above as to why.
1)Buying chocolate is entirely a matter of choice. Their is little alternative to having a current account in the 21st century and as such a PCA is a utility.
2) Unlike chocolate the PCA market is not competitive enough to offer real choices between providers in the way their offerings are structured and priced - these were the findings of both the Cruickshank Report and the OFT Market Study. And unlike the confectionary business the banking industry have an agreement in place to maintain the price of their products.0 -
So, how long before a bank has an account that will not incur any charges if you go overdrawn? Or is there one already?
If not then would there be a major rush of people opening up an account but, not sure whether it would work for the banks.'Dont Bury Your Head In The Sand As Your Problems Will Still Exist'
Debt Free Since 1st September 2009:j0 -
Alpine_Star wrote: »In incurring any insufficient funds charge you are still abiding by the terms of the contract - as per Justice Smith's High Court declaration on penalties.
Your chocolate analogy is poor and there are 2 additional reasons to Big Budgie's above as to why.
1)Buying chocolate is entirely a matter of choice. Their is little alternative to having a current account in the 21st century and as such a PCA is a utility.
2) Unlike chocolate the PCA market is not competitive enough to offer real choices between providers in the way their offerings are structured and priced - these were the findings of both the Cruickshank Report and the OFT Market Study. And unlike the confectionary business the banking industry have an agreement in place to maintain the price of their products.
Completely agree.
Premier, also remember that since the late 70's thacherism ensured that wages were paid directly to a bank account and that ordinary people had no choice in that.
Slightly off tangent, but related-
At that time, and this is why historical charges and TC's are so important, very little information was provided by the banks about conditions and it was not provided in plain English. The financial and banking climate was also entirely different, with for example, the opportunity to discuss personal financial issues with a known bank manager. The move to telephone banking etc and automation was entirely without reference to clients. It is only very recently that the average person can understand TC's for some accounts and this was brought about by the campaign, not by banks themselves nor instigated by regulation.Please ignore those people who post on this forum who deliberately try to misinform you. Don't be bullied by them, don't be blamed by them. You know who I mean.
You come here for advice, help and support- thats what I and like minded others will try to do.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards