£30 charge for under 18?

clarkd

Hello All!

Okay. Here's the situation. My sister has a regular saving account of which she pays money into each month (opened end of January). Last month she made her first payment into the account by standing order (and set it to re-occur).

She forgot she had set it to re-occur and when it did this month she didnt have enough money in the account and it temporarily went into negative figures and then the money was bounced back.

She is only 16 and has a flexaccount at Nationwide. I understand as an under 18 year old she is not allowed to have an overdraft (I understand that this was not an overdraft as the money did bounce but...

She has been charged £30 for this incident - is this correct? Do these charges apply for under 18's as they can't have an overdraft?

I hope someone out there can help me understand all of this!
Thanks,
Dave

KeithP

So Nationwide were asked to transfer some money from a flexaccount, but there wasn't enough money in the account. Is that right?

From what you have said, it seems like they took the money out of the account then realised the 'no overdraft' rule so replaced it.

Obviously that was a bit of non-productive effort.
It appears Nationwide charge £30 for an unpaid Standing Order.
Their Flexaccount Charges webpage explains...

Account charges
Charge for an unpaid Direct Debit, standing order, bill payment or regular transfer when you do not have enough cleared funds...
£30 each time

I would send your sister to the local Nationwide branch and ask them to explain this charge to her. They might refund the charge.

Lokolo

You can either

a) get the charge refunded (you can, as she is under 18)

b) teach your sister the value of keeping an eye on her accounts

obviously if she can do both great.... but if shes anything like my brother, the charges will keep coming, then at 18, they'll stick.

Renya

If it's any help, although I'm with Barclays I did once go into negative figures on my account by about £2, (I'm 17) I was very worried and spoke to them about it and asked if they would charge me, but they said they couldn't.

clarkd

Thanks guys!

I'll get her to go in (she'll probably take her mom with her though! ) and ask why etc - and get them to say but she's under 18 so why etc etc. Sound good?

I'll get her to quote what you said too Keith, "Obviously that was a bit of non-productive effort. " - Sounds good, and makes the charges seem questionable!

I don't think she'll do it again - as it wasn't as though she didnt check balances etc - she just forgot about the payment - which isn't like her actually!

So again, thankyou! I'll let you know how it goes!
Dave

4743hudsonj

Hang on, to me this doesnt seem like your usual overdraft fee etc for under 18's.

This is the opposite. They have NOT allowed her to spend more than she has, as a result the SO bounced and because of this she was charged. Now i could be wrong but i see no reason why an under 18 couldnt be charged a fee for the administration of a bounced SO if that is what he/she agreed to by joining the account.

IMHO it seems like she does owe the money and her being under 18 is irrelevant as the charges have no association with credit to a minor.

Like i said i could be wrong anyway but thats what common sense is telling me as some people seem to be jumping the gun and stating action that should be taken for credit charges.

Id wait for more definitive advice before going in but i certainly still recommend going in and appealing to their better nature no matter the situation.

clarkd

^^ That is what I feared! Well they'll hopefully go in tommrowo (well today!) and have a chat to someone there etc!

Dave

4743hudsonj

clarkd wrote: »

^^ That is what I feared! Well they'll hopefully go in tommrowo (well today!) and have a chat to someone there etc!

Dave

I know when i was under 18 there were certain charges made aware to me in my "contract" and that things like wrong details on paying in slips may have small fees attached because of admin.

Optimist

4743hudsonj wrote: »

Hang on, to me this doesnt seem like your usual overdraft fee etc for under 18's.

This is the opposite. They have NOT allowed her to spend more than she has, as a result the SO bounced and because of this she was charged. Now i could be wrong but i see no reason why an under 18 couldnt be charged a fee for the administration of a bounced SO if that is what he/she agreed to by joining the account.

IMHO it seems like she does owe the money and her being under 18 is irrelevant as the charges have no association with credit to a minor.

Like i said i could be wrong anyway but thats what common sense is telling me as some people seem to be jumping the gun and stating action that should be taken for credit charges.

Id wait for more definitive advice before going in but i certainly still recommend going in and appealing to their better nature no matter the situation.

I agree with this, it would seem to be an admin charge and more than likely covered under the terms and conditions of the account.. Definitely go into the to the branch and query it though. Ask nicely and they might use their discretion and remove the charges.

williham

Under 18 year olds can be given an overdraft, but they can't be pursued for the debt as you're not deemed responsible for your debt until you're 18 so banks choose not to.

lindos90

I hope she does get her money back, if you go into the bank to discuss it, that might help. Hopefully someone at the bank will see it was a genuine mistake while shes trying to get used to her finances.

Good on her for starting a regular savers account at her age, at least shes starting to think sensibly about her money, most of the 18 year olds I know would spend it on cider!!