WHY do banks refund bank charges?

dchurch24

Not really, because it doesn't really change anything. It can only be refered to - it's not a precident.

His name was definetly 'Smith' - his CAG username was 'Smudger'.

YorkshireBoy

dchurch24 wrote:

Incidentily, you state that she had not ever received any charges - please read her thread again. You obviously missed the part where she stated that SHE HAD incurred charges on her Egg card.

Really?

me4bargains wrote:

It's so unfair because I have never missed payments and all I'm trying to do is keep over myself and my two children's head above water.

dchurch24

me4bargains wrote:

I have two cards and two loans with them and thay have come to the conclusion to raise my interest by 6 per cent because I made one payment late

Yes. Really.

YorkshireBoy

me4bargains wrote:

I have two cards and two loans with them and thay have come to the conclusion to raise my interest by 6 per cent because I made one payment late FIVE years ago.

Sorry, I'd forgotten this (possibly irrelevant) bit in one of her earlier posts. (Just for clarity, I've quoted her full text above. )

The fact remains that she had got on top of her problems, and was paying her debt off at 15.9% APR. As a direct result (in my opinion) of the CAG/OFT action, she is now paying them off at 21.9% APR. That distresses me.

dchurch24

Well, ok. That's your opinion.

I believe it probably has more to do with Egg making a loss overall, than any other factor, and that the interest would have gone up in any case.

Anyway, this is rather off-topic.

YorkshireBoy

dchurch24 wrote:

I believe it probably has more to do with Egg making a loss overall...

Egg are making a profit 'overall', although I concede that certain areas of their business are not doing so well.

and that the interest would have gone up in any case.

Are Capital One in trouble as well then, because they've put my wife's purchases APR up from 14.9 to 17.9% APR?

dchurch24

Maybe it is to do with the charges being forced down, or not - I don't know.

Maybe it's to do with a lot more people stoozing?

If it is, then fair enough (and I expect the charges to drop further) - now people know that they're being ripped off. Over the span of a few years these levels of interest won't be sustainable as the petty 'we'll show them' attitude will die off and they will realise that they are competing in a very competitive market and be forced to act accordingly once again.

The more you borrow, the more you pay. Sounds fair to me.

Paul_Herring

dchurch24 wrote:

Maybe it is to do with the charges being forced down, or not - I don't know.

Maybe it's to do with a lot more people stoozing?

I was under the impression that the number of people (and amounts being stoozed) were dropping largely due to
1) A general decrease in limits being offered and
2) the widespread introduction (and increase in) fees making stoozing financially impracticle.

MPH80

Whether or not reclaiming charges and charges being forced down are the reason for the interest going up - it certainly gave them the excuse.

Banks could never have used Stoozers as the excuse because it would have resulted in mass-media publicity for the tactic. Which up to now has received some mention - but not much.

Reclaiming charges on the other hand - went through the government and the OFT. It was already out there.

M.

dchurch24

I still think it's quite active - although, you may be quite right - it may well have dropped off a bit - I don't know.

It has been quoted by some credit card firms that stoozing is costing them money and as a result were going to do something about it (citation needed here - I think it was a BBC article) - and of course, also blaming the OFT ruling about their default charges.

I think there are a few factors - probably more than a few. I don't think any of the card companies would have put their interest up without some serious thought.