MSE News: CONFIRMED - OFT gives up bank charges battle

esmerellda

Arrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !

natweststaffmember

esmerellda wrote: »

Arrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !

Ditto but you know you are agreeing with me now

esmerellda

Why do we do this Natts ?

Alpine_Star

gobbo wrote: »

Ok to explain it to you

bills are proposed , most of those that stand a chance of being passed are proposed by the government .

Bills go to the house of commons and house of lords to be debated

if passed by both houses they become an act

The law is then brought into force

If the government has a majority then it is rare that governmanet bills are rejected as they use a 3 line whip to force their bills through parliament ( hence the often quoted " elected dictatorship" )

Hope that this simplified explanation now means that you understand it.

I asked, quite politely, if you would kindly do me the courtesy of quoting the text from the link I provided that says how ''Government makes laws through Parliament.'' and I'd be grateful to you if you would do just that. Please?

natweststaffmember

esmerellda wrote: »

Why do we do this Natts ?

Cos we are mad and unfortunately no one has the guts to section us yet.....

and I have not had a life for a few years

gobbo

Here is an extract from the link , why you want me to copy it for you I don't know , asyou can read it yourself . I won't copy all of it as it will take up too much space but here is a snippet.






A Bill is a proposal for a new law, or a proposal to change an existing law, presented for debate before Parliament. ( as I said in my explanation to you most bills that have a chance of succeeding are proposed by the government)


What happens at first reading?

The short title of the Bill read is out and is followed by an order for the Bill to be printed.
What happens after first reading?

The Bill is published as a House of Commons paper for the first time.
The next stage is second reading, the first opportunity for MPs to debate the general principles and themes of the Bill.


Second reading is the first opportunity for MPs to debate the main principles of the Bill.
It usually takes place no sooner than two weekends after first reading.
What happens at second reading?

The Government minister, spokesperson or MP responsible for the Bill opens the second reading debate.
The official Opposition spokesperson responds with their views on the Bill.
The debate continues with other Opposition parties and backbench MPs giving their opinions.
At the end of the debate, the Commons decides whether the Bill should be given its second reading by voting, meaning it can proceed to the next stage.
It is possible for a Bill to have a second reading with no debate - as long as MPs agree to its progress.






IF you want to learn some more I suggest that you read the information in your own link as its pretty pointless discussing it on this forum when all the information you need is in your link.

Alpine_Star wrote: »

I asked, quite politely, if you would kindly do me the courtesy of quoting the text from the link I provided that says how ''Government makes laws through Parliament.'' and I'd be grateful to you if you would do just that. Please?

davidgmmafan

oldwiring wrote: »

True under the 1986 Insolvency Act, bur not since passing of Enterprise Act 2002 it seems

Secondly there are preferential creditors, which at the moment comprise the Inland Revenue for certain elements of tax debt particularly PAYE, H M Custom & Excise for Value Added Tax and certain employees' rights. However, shortly both the Inland Revenue and H M Customs & Excise will cease to have the status of preferential creditors. Preferential creditors have the right to have their debts paid before ordinary creditors from assets of the company that are not secured.
http://www.crossmans.co.uk/services/insolvency/
Section 9.
And
2. What category of debt is no longer considered preferential?
Amounts due to the Inland Revenue in respect of income tax and National Insurance contributions in the 12 months prior to the insolvency, and amounts due to HM Customs and Excise including VAT in the 6 months prior to the insolvency. Other categories of preferential debt will remain preferential
http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/faq/faqeactp.htm

I stand corrected, but that kinda strengthens my argument. Why should the banks be allowed, via the charging structure, to proritize debts owed to them over others when even the taxman can't?

A lot of confusion surrounds the phrase 'paying' charges. I am not so concerned about people who incur charges who can afford to cover them, its sad but if they don't learn from their mistakes (in the sense that if they can afford to pay the charges they clearly have the resources to avoid them) that's just tough.

What I do have a problem with is the people who cannot cover the initial charge because the resulting snowball ruins lives. And I know what you'll say the consequences should deter them, but !!!! happens, and this argument doesn't help the many people who find themselves in this situation.

I wish I could believe the banks when they say they are mindful of customer facing hardship but thier actions contradict thier words.

Lets say you have a guy on JSA, you can see this from his bank account. He gets one charge of £30 +.

That was his meagre shopping money/elec money/insert any essential here money.

Do you

A) Use some common sense and actually try to help
Allow your automated system to rack up £100's, maybe thousands which will take him years to clear if/when he gets back into work, or ruining his credit file for six years if he doesn't manage this.

Most banks choose option B, because you agreed to the T & C's. I can only assume, as others have suggested, they somehow make money from selling on the debt. Perhaps they claim on insurance as well as sell it on? I don't know.

I can't see any sense in what they are doing, they are not even looking after thier own interests.

esmerellda

mmm as good a place as any

The OFT are 'reportedly' working on a voluntary (grrr) code of bank charges, so have done a wee draft on which some comments would be appreciated, maybe we can strengthen it and send it over with some other bits we're working on and get our opinions heard ?

---

PRE CONTRACT

We will provide, in plain intelligible language, a list and explanation of charges which may be incurred on your account.

You may opt out of any service which offers to consider payment or non payment of unguaranteed transactions if they may take you over any agreed overdraft limit. There may be a monthly fee for providing the opt out service. This will be no more than £10 per statement period.

DURING THE TIME YOUR ACCOUNT IS OPERATIONAL

We will display in our branches :
i) a notice about the current Fees and Charges applicable to all accounts.
ii) a list of services which are rendered free of charge.
iii) a notice incorporating charges leviable for non maintenance of minimum balances and charges for deposit/withdrawal at ATM locations .

We will correct any mistakes promptly and cancel any bank charges that we apply due to our mistake.

Shall not charge any fees more than the transaction value which created it or £[15] (whichever is larger)

We shall not charge any fee for exceeding the agreed overdraft limit more than the amount by which your account exceeds any agreed overdraft limit or £[15] (whichever is larger) in any one statement period.

We shall not charge any fee for exceeding the agreed overdraft limit should the reason the overdraft limit was exceeded be due solely to charges levied by us.

We shall give you (30) days notice of any charges due to be taken from your account.

We shall only charge a maximum of 3 charges in any one day or 9 in any one statement period.



Changes in Fees & Charges

If we increase any of these charges or introduce a new charge, it will be notified at least one month prior to the revised charges being levied / becoming effective.

If you do not agree with the Changes in Fees & Charges notified to you you may close your account providing you do so within one month of receipt of the notification.

If you have an overdraft with us at the time we notify you of any changes to Fees & Charges we shall agree with you repayment terms at an affordable rate over a specified period and shall only continue charging interest as previously applied to your overdraft.

We shall not add any further charges to your account from the time you notify us you do not agree to the Changes to Fees & Charges notified to you and commence repayments on terms as agreed between us.

---

Premier_2

esmerellda wrote: »

Why do we do this Natts ?

natweststaffmember wrote: »

Cos we are mad and unfortunately no one has the guts to section us yet.....

and I have not had a life for a few years

I'm glad you said that

It would probably have been removed if anyone else dared to suggest so.

rickbonar

Alpine_Star wrote: »

So to summarise: you've not read any of the words but prefer to base your opinion excusively on ones that are not there. With no evidence whatsoever and only your imagination to go on, who's really naive here?

I have read only the cursory outline of the case true.

"With no evidence whatsoever" is wrong as the last writer noted 'there was something fishy' also there are many cases where the law for an ordinary member of the public and the "great and the good" or large institutions or businesses the outcomes seem very different -very unbalanced.
I keep mentioning the de Menezes case do look it up ... Our good friend Sir Ian Blair like so many of his ilk eg. the Haringey social worker boss, The Railtrack chairman, Fred Goodwin etc. hung on never owning up to any incompetence.

Most observers in these cases can see what is there ( the real truth) however courts and government seem to want to Black out the incriminating text.

Now don't you wonder why?

I would say it's a little more than "only my imagination" and I'm sure many others will agree!

Apparently the chinese can and do use the death penalty for fraud and major embezzlement crimes. I wonder how our present crop of MPs and bankers would fare there?