.....................

bengal-stripe

onlypaddy wrote: »

.........to put £1000 of transactions through in a week..........

Well, for a week our OP could lead the Life of Riley.............that's seven days more than most of us!

pugsyts

thank you for all your replies. You all have missed the point. I have always taken responsibility for my spending. My complaint is how can a bank make such a massive banking error and then call me a liar and say i didnt make the instruction of cancelling my overdraft. As soon as i realised i was in arrears i stopped spending. And rang up to pay it off. But was told of massive charges that i would have to pay. Just a sorry would have been enough at the time for me to go away. And you wonder why this country is in such a state. Is because of the bully banks and a pass the buck culture. if the bank had admited their error i would have walked away and paid the amount over. SIMPLE . Plus i posted my complaint to get advice not a load of abuse from such sad people. I feel sorry for those posters. Thanks to all the other posters . I will continue my fight.

crispy_chris

You got advice, you spent the money without checking your balance (your responsibility not the banks) and got charged.

The advice is thus: pay up.

[edit: you thought you had no overdraft, but you went out and somehow spent over £1000.00 more than you had (the overdraft and then some to take you into arrears). The banks arent there to hold your hand, if you want someone to monitor your finances for you, they're called accountants]

pugsyts

missing the point. if i had no overdraft the three payments would not have been taken out. what the transactions were are nor here nor there. if no available funds are in your account the transactions should have been declined.

i do 100% agree its my responsibility to check balances and yes i am taking responsibility for the paymenyts. however i am complaining about the fact the bank then called me a liar and said my call never exsisted and tried to cover it up. do you not think this is a massive breach in trust from the bank? the bank failed to adhere by my instruction, the bank knew exactly what they were doing by not cancelling my overdraft they knew i would go into it and they would earn valuable income. we are forgetting this is how the banks make money. By not acting on my instruction they are breaking the banking code. no matter what. and thats what i want to get justiced for rather than beibng called a liar and being told i did not instruct this.

get it???

peachyprice

pugsyts wrote: »

they knew i would go into it and they would earn valuable income.

I understand your frustration that they did not do as you instructed, but the comment above defies logic.

If you asked for the o/d to be removed why would they 'know' you would go back into it? As far as they were concerned your finances were under control, the fact that they didn't physically remove the facility does not mean they were deliberately trying to make you o/d again.

If you knew you no longer had an o/d you should either not have spent so much, or should have cancelled any payments due to come out. BEFORE they were due, knowing full well you had no funds to pay them. If they had not been paid out of the uncancelled o/d how did you intend paying them?

As you're being cagey as to what these 3 payments are it seems you knew they were due to be paid but was relying on the bank refusing them rather than dealing with the situation before it got that far.

pugsyts

At last a sensible post. The payments were to retailers. I just assumed i had funds. Thats all. My complaint at first was why was my instruction not adhered too! The rest is escalation since. I was willing to pay the payment at the start.

onlypaddy

pugsyts wrote: »

if i had no overdraft the three payments would not have been taken out

no, even if they had cancelled your overdraft as requested then the payments would have gone out...i explained the card process in my previous post, as has the bank.

ok - for them to say that payments would no longer be taken out if you had insufficent funds was wrong as it is the card process they have to honour.

the fact remains, for them to carry out your instruction would have meant someone manually bypassing the automated card process every time you use your card - and im sure you'll agree thats not going to happen.

no matter what spin you put on it, you spent over £1000 with the delusion that you had that money. 'oh, they will stop this if i dont have it' isn't an excuse because that isnt the banks responsibility - to provide this service to people would cost them millions!

and you certainly sounded as though you were trying to wriggle out of it- the sentence in your original post sums up what you really want nicely - to get out of paying back a debt: my advice is to grow up and pay it back and stop trying to squirm out of it.
"Do you not think its fair I get Compensation for all this trouble? Obviously i will pay what I spent, but surely compensation should be given to me. Perhaps totalling the amount i spent £1200??"

onlypaddy

You replied while i was replying...

pugsyts wrote: »

I just assumed i had funds. Thats all. My complaint at first was why was my instruction not adhered too! The rest is escalation since. I was willing to pay the payment at the start.

This backs up my above post. You assumed, and you know where assuming gets you...

You were willing to pay at the start because you spent it. And it wasnt pre-arranged transactions you forgot about - 'payments to retailers'. You went shopping.

You were charged because you spent money you didnt have.

You should still be willing to pay it all!

peachyprice

pugsyts wrote: »

At last a sensible post. The payments were to retailers. I just assumed i had funds. Thats all. My complaint at first was why was my instruction not adhered too! The rest is escalation since. I was willing to pay the payment at the start.

Oh come on, how can you possibly assume you had £1k more than you did, £20, £30, even £100 I can see, easily done, but £1k?

You are taking the bank for a fool, and they are not playing, quite rightly so.

pugsyts

onlypaddy wrote: »

no, even if they had cancelled your overdraft as requested then the payments would have gone out...i explained the card process in my previous post, as has the bank.


get your facts right before posting. the card process does not cover this . payments are honered for up to 6 mths with a retailer but the payment still has to be authorised via the bank to confirm available funds first. otherwise what is stoping people who have no available funds spending? they cant, as you and i know if i tried using my card to buy anything it would get declined in the first instance due to having no available funds.....!!!!

It has been confirmed by the bank that the only reason the payments came out were because the overdraft was still active, with this included and my credit i had available funds.

Pl