Unauthorised payments

Nick_B_3

Sorry Hammyman but you are wrong. The meaning is considered to be nothing can be taken from payments before you receive them. Once the payments are in the account the bank has the right to charge on any overdrawn balance via their terms and conditions.

marleyboy

Bank charges and Acts of Parliament governing benefits

The two Acts of Parliament that govern how benefits are paid are the Social Security Administration Act 1992 and the Tax Credit's Act 2002. Both of these have clauses which apparently make it unlawful for banks to impose bank charges on benefits:
Social Security Administration Act 1992 Section 187:

187.—(1) Subject to the provision of this Act, every assignment of or charge on–
(a) benefit as defined in section 122 of the Contributions and Benefits Act;
[3(aa) a jobseeker’s allowance;]
(b) any income-related benefit; or
(c) child benefit,
and every agreement to assign or charge such benefit shall be void;



Tax Credits Act 2002 Section 45:

45. Inalienability

(1) Every assignment of or charge on a tax credit, and every agreement to assign or charge a tax credit, is void;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?125278

tcr_3

I do sympathise with what you guys are saying about the SSAA1992, it's been debated umpteen times.

But the fact that Crisis Loans pay out in exactly these circumstances, rather than referring the customer back to the bank to argue their case, suggests to me that DWP itself doesn't believe that the SSAA1992 can be used to prevent banks clawing back charges in these circumstances.

Would be genuinely interested to see if there's any examples of someone winning their case with the bank on this one.

thebaileys

I was on maternity leave a few years ago, and quoted the above statement to Natwest who refund the money back to my account straight away.

Also worked with Santander, who again refunded the money.

I got myself in a pit of a pickle as went down to smp, and had a couple of charges.

It was thanks to a poster on here, I got them back.

Good Luck

AsknAnswer2

That section of the SS Act (187) does not apply to banks offsetting payments, nor bank charges - it never has. That particular section of the Act has been misinterpreted many times over the years. The government responded to a petition about exactly this way back in 2008, which sets the record straight. I've quoted the response they released below and provided a link to the response on the government's petition site.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page16882

The purpose of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 Section 187 and section 45 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 is to prevent people’s benefit money being at risk by it being assigned over to a third party in settlement of a debt. It is not intended to prohibit the application of bank charges. Bank charges are in the nature of an expense, and are incurred by the holder of the account; tax credits and benefits are payable in order to help customers meet their expenses, and as such it is legitimate for banks to deduct charges from the balance of an account held in that bank, whether the money paid into the account comes from tax credits, benefits or other sources, such as earnings.

dmg24

I agree with tcr and AsknAnswer2 - the charge that the Act refers to means a legal charge, not a charge in the lay sense of the word. However, you do have the right to request the right of appropriation against monies in your account, but this would normally need to be requested in advance of any (lay) charges. It should also be noted that the bank does not have to grant this right, but it *may* be contrary to their Code if they do not.

OP, as asked earlier, do you owe the Halifax money?

dazzadub

i think its all about the bank etc. i dont think there is any law saying not to take money from benefits but i think its a verbal agreement that the bank it self want charge for be overdraw and not to charge you.

i had this problem before bank charged my for being overdrawn etc

went ot bank and they refunded everything id been charged for since going onto benefit

Murgatroyd21

Have a look here too for some further advice http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/banking/setting-off

pebbles88

OrkneyStar wrote: »

This sounds a bit confused.
Last I knew was Bank of Scotland/Halifax/Lloyds were part of one group (along with some others) but Royal Bank of Scotland/Natwest (also along with others) were a separate group ?
Also agree that a Post Office account would be a good idea. The whole not being able to take benefit money thing is correct in theory, but it still happens in practice (something to do with bank saying money is money once it is in there....even though there is clearly a list of where credits come from!).

Hi OrkneyStar,

i dont know what the set up in the past was but now RBS/natwest/halifax are all the same under parent group RBS.... really not sure about lloyds though I must admit. I don't know when it all changed either. I am only aware from when i have been having to contact all my creditors.

OrkneyStar

pebbles88 wrote: »

Hi OrkneyStar,

i dont know what the set up in the past was but now RBS/natwest/halifax are all the same under parent group RBS.... really not sure about lloyds though I must admit. I don't know when it all changed either. I am only aware from when i have been having to contact all my creditors.

Hmmm, I was aware Natwest was under same umbrella as Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), however Halifax is under the Bank of Scotland (HBoS)/Lloyds umbrella.
Are you sure you are not confusing Royal Bank of Scotland and (Halifax)Bank of Scotland ?
Lloyds/HBOS from wikipedia!
RBS from wikipedia!
Not meaning to argue, hope you get things sorted with your creditors! I remember working in debt advice and writing to one place only to get a letter back from another (and apparently different address)....or writing to 5 different catalogues and them all sending letters from same address lol! Crazy!