End of free banking..

Niv

I do not know how people think of an overdraft. I think of it as a loan although I believe some people think of it as 'free money' that they can draw on and pay back 'later'. I prefer to think of it as a loan/debt that would only be used in case of emergancy.

However I do feel that changing conditions for people that are already in debt is not terribly fair and there should be a fairer way to do this. Maybe requesting a meeting with the customer to discuss their finances and advise ways to work themselves out of the overdraft, if they refuse to attend the meeting/fail then the penalty could be the increased charges, but to just increase them for people who are only using thier authorised overdraft is unfair. But who said the world was fair I guess

ERICS_MUM

Overdraft limits that are not used, and overdrawn accounts with no agreed o/d both cost the banks a lot of money now that inter-bank lending is more expensive and has quite an impact on liquidity.

So I can understand LTSB charging a fee plus interest for anyone going overdrawn without an o/d or exceeding the o/d limit, OR charging a fee for accounts with agreed o/ds that aren't used.

But the OP regularly uses a pre-agreed o/d so I'm not sure why Lloyds need to charge him/her a fee as well.

opinions4u

ERICS_MUM wrote: »

But the OP regularly uses a pre-agreed o/d so I'm not sure why Lloyds need to charge him/her a fee as well.

It's simple. Because political and consumer pressure (take a look at the picture on the top left corner of this page) has effectively forced them to reduce charges to those who abuse their account.

Being a business, they need to replace that lost income. So they adjust charging structures accordingly.

Lokolo

davidgmmafan wrote: »

Wow so you've read every post EVER on this forum relating to reclaiming? That's some amazing dedication there.

No but the poster has just signed up to vent about the overdraft charges. With 1 post to their name, do you really think they're here asking for help?

They haven't said so in their post, nor have they returned to ask for help..... You don't exactly need common sense to work it out do you?

exel1966

tiff wrote: »

Well maybe its down to us to show them the way?

Agreed, however first and foremost individuals have to take responsibility for their actions and accept where they've gone wrong without lambasting all n sundry because of their own errors.

If they're not willing to listen and change then it all falls upon deaf ears. Some people only hear what they want to hear and will forever blame others for their own misgivings regardless of any good advice/intentions given.

It seems to be the way society is nowadays.

davidgmmafan

"However I do feel that changing conditions for people that are already in debt is not terribly fair and there should be a fairer way to do this"

This is exactly what happens with credit cards, customer can say no thank you I'll repay with interest etc at the AGREED rate. For bank accounts Halifax (and presumably others could chance thier arm) state they CANNOT close the account unless the balance is paid off. This can trap some people into debt as £1 per day is £30 ish per month. If the bank doesn't budge their most rational course of action may be to stop paying esp, if they are insolvent, or negotiatioe a lower payment whtn the debt is sold on. This would only work if they don't need credit for about the next six years.

"It's simple. Because political and consumer pressure (take a look at the picture on the top left corner of this page) has effectively forced them to reduce charges to those who abuse their account.

Being a business, they need to replace that lost income. So they adjust charging structures accordingly."

Assuming what you say is correct (dis-agree with the term abuse, because the test case said the charges are NOT for breach of contract which is what the term abuse indicates, see the the banks play on words make non-sense of reality?), then people CANNOT continue to berate thosewho pay charges or now higher interest.

If, as such people argue, those people are idtios and dammit they all ought to shape up and stop using O/D's then it follows logically that the banks will HAVE TO replace this lost revunue. So whichever way you slice it if EVERYONE acts as you INSIST they should there'll be charges for everyone.

Of course you can take your money out of the banks in protest, but this isn't going to be an option if you have a large amount of savings.

exel1966

davidgmmafan wrote: »

Utter rubbish. At the end of the day you believe what you want to believe. Your comment sounds like the way the banks now respond to ANY criticism of the level of thier charges. They say it is the way you have operated the account which led to the charges. Of course this is true in the first instance, but there are literally hundreds, maybe even thousands, of examples where a minor miscalculation transformed into HUNDREDS of pounds.

I'd like to believe that if someone incurred a bank charge and geninely couldn't pay it the bank would work with them. Unfortunately the reality is that they WILL NOT DO SO. They will continue to apply the charges and ruin that person. I know it can be difficult for some people to understand that some people cannot cover a £30 charge ,but if that's half your weekly income it would take some doing.

I have NEVER experience this but I can observe that not everyone in the world is identical. Do you even know how much JSA is?

I'd have to agree with you too. You started your reply with "Utter Rubbish" and that set the tone for every word that followed from you.

Charges are an optional extra, the majority don't pay them because they manage. Some can't be bothered, some learn from their mistakes, others bury their head in the sand and then are surprised when reality finally hits home. Banks can, will and do listen to those who play by the rules rather than flout them, however they are businesses, not charities.

Yes charges are high, that's without doubt, but it's not as if they're a stealth charge. Just about the whole population is aware of what can and will happen. I mean it's in the news everyday !

As for JSA, it's nothing to do with this thread.

davidgmmafan

Actually by the banks own arguments in court nobody is flouting the rules, they are all merely using a service.

Read my most recent post, if everyone does as you say and is PERFECTLY rational you will be worse off. You should be grateful for those people.

Lokolo I stand corrected, if your comments were directed at that particular poster then they do make sense. I thought they were aimed any anyone querying charges, many of whom DO ask for help generally as well as with the immediate issue.

babyfreckles

Lokolo wrote: »

No but the poster has just signed up to vent about the overdraft charges. With 1 post to their name, do you really think they're here asking for help?

They haven't said so in their post, nor have they returned to ask for help..... You don't exactly need common sense to work it out do you?

Hang on a sec, at the end of the OPs post, did it not say 'Any Advice'?!? Surely that is an ask for help!?

Lokolo

babyfreckles wrote: »

Hang on a sec, at the end of the OPs post, did it not say 'Any Advice'?!? Surely that is an ask for help!?

Indeed, and it was given in post 6: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=36657709&postcount=6

The OP never came back though! They want to stop the charges, not get out their overdraft it seems.