MSE News: CONFIRMED - OFT gives up bank charges battle

[Deleted User]

mustrum_ridcully wrote: »

Well said :T

People would do well to remember that the OFT is funded by the taxpayer and were using taxpayers money to fund this court battle. That includes money from taxpayers who have never been overdrawn in their lives (including authorised overdrafts).

If the OFT had won, we'd probably have seen the end of "free" banking so taxpayers money would have been spent to make everyone worse off in the long term (include those who can't manage their finances). Beware the law of unintended consequences!

Yes I have been charged an unauthorised overdraft fee, albeit many years ago and it jolly well did me good!

Oh please, I've never smoked in my life (or had or caused many other ailments blah blah blah) but I don't whinge about taxes being used for the greater good as in NHS treatment etc... get over yourself... you pay your taxes and it is spent as required for what is hopefully the greater good... sometimes that won't be to your direct benefit but it doesn't mean it doesn't have SIGNIFICANT benefit for many others...

chris1huk

the people who are in credit get interest.. so in effect are getting paid by the people who borrow.. that's fair enough.. just add on the transaction fees or whatever then everyone can live with equally priced banking

MasterSpy

knowga wrote: »

I must say I am completely disappointed with this decision by the OFT. Why give up? If the OFT can't protect us - who can? And as for all the "happy with the decision" posts...In my experience of having an £11 Direct debit get declined and having a £35 charge for unpaid DD AND a £25 charge for going overdrawn...to me, these posters are calling this "fair and just". I'm sorry but it is NOT fair and just. And to be able to get charges of similar nature paid back to me, from over a number of years, are of REAL importance. Thats what MSE has been campaigning to do, and is trying to continue to do...the MSE has my full support...Unfortunately, the group created to do this, the OFT, isn't performing its role to the consumer. Why give up if they thought it was unfair in the first place? They should explore another route and this time have it clear and precise so as not to have any ambiguity on the result.

As I pointed out above, the OFT cannot protect 'you' or 'us' because it does not have the power to do so. The power was handed long ago to Brussels and to the institutions of the European Union. The judgement of the UK Supreme Court merely reflected that. This is, incidentally why no further action will be taken. You can talk all you want about it, but at the end of the day you cannot change EU law.

chipbeck

david.l wrote: »

For all you people who are defending the banks saying "oh you shouldn't of spent money you never had"

well when the banks spent other peoples money you do realise if the goverment never bailed them out you would of lost all your money you had in them!!

Quite true David. Must admit that the only amusement I've had with banking in recent times is when there's a threat of one of em going bust.

Mile long queues of people who have never incurred a charge kacking themselves in case they've lost their money. Wonder what they would be saying on here if the banks had said to them 'sorry we have spent your money and are closing down'.

DavyM

My wife came away with a statement once that I wholeheartedly agree with (not the only time of course)."Money makes you better off, it doesn't make you a better person!"

discodave247

First post on the site, but I am amazed to see the comments from some people who are rubbing their hands with glee at the news that the OFT is dropping the bank charges case. Whilst I agree everyone is entitled to there own opinion, the majority of people don’t need to be told that this is great news; surely the sensible approach would be to stop being so short sighted and recognise that the amount charged should be fair and proportionate. I have also noticed with amazement comments such as “people should learn to live within their means” however at the start of the year, the company I worked with went in to administration; I didn’t receive a single penny. I paid what I could but was charged for going over my overdraft, missing payments etc. I would have considered myself as living within my means while I was working, but on the second month of little or no income, I can fully sympathise at being charged £35 for missing a payment due to insufficient funds and a further £28 for going over my overdraft, and all this for the measly 57p over my overdraft limit.

Let’s look at this rationally, we are only looking for a fair and reasonable charge amount, the banks have already changed the cost and structure of their charges which would intimate that they think they are wrong.

I agree there should be a penalty for misuse, but that fee should not be unreasonable.

BOB_A_H

slim_shady123 wrote: »

well if i have lost £5000 after three years and every1 was being paid out before then i would rather see my branch burnt to the ground and go to prison than let the money be lost !

Know how you feel. In the same boat, only to the tune of about £7-500. Only got a list of my charges back about 2 weeks ago and am !!!!ed off at the 10 quid that cost me. Would have donated the tenner to charity had I known what was going to happen.

kittiej

So were people happy with their pensions being used as a prop?

What if the money can't magically reappear again?

It doesn't sound good tbh

UncleJaysus

mustrum_ridcully wrote: »

If the OFT had won, we'd probably have seen the end of "free" banking so taxpayers money would have been spent to make everyone worse off in the long term (include those who can't manage their finances). Beware the law of unintended consequences!

You're exactly the type of person my post on page 2 was aimed at...

You think that it's better to let the banks do as they wish to the poor, just so YOU won't have to pay monthly for your banking. Just because the banks made that threat, doesn't mean that those people currently being shafted don't deserve justice.

I suppose if clothing companies came along and said, "well, we could pay more wages to our sweatshop workers and give them a chance at decent lives, but that would mean higher prices," you would turn around and say "sod the sweatshops" just because YOU want cheaper clothes?

People like you make me sick. Justice should be fought to the bitter end, regardless of the threats made by those in power.

The_White_Horse

i think bank fees should have a "punitive" element to them. Imagine if you were charged 50p or 1.00 for each transgression? people would go mad racking up debts - I would. It would be far cheaper than a loan or credit cards.

No one has to incur these charges. I have been caught once or twice, but it was my own fault, for not keeping track of the account. In this day and age of internet banking, telephone banking, SMS, hole in the wall etc, you can check your account 10 times a day.

If you are very bad with money, take all your money out on pay day and spend cash. when you run out, you run out. and no charges ever.