How will reclaiming bank charges impact banking discussion

IvanOpinion

Nathan_Spleen wrote: »

On a subject of penalties, an issue that is yet to be decided in a precedent setting court of law, I would say that everyone's opinion is equally as valid.

Which is exactly why I have always questioned them being called 'illegal' or 'unlawful' ... until proven in a court of law the worst that can be said about them is that they are 'unfair' (and even then that depends on your definition of 'fair')

ivan

Whitedove

Your arguments leave me astounded. Those who have found it necessary to reclaim unfair charges appear to have incurred these charges time after time. They are now able, in most cases, to argue the rights and wrongs in great depth. If you are so clever, how on earth did you let the situation arise in the first place?
Perhaps you are budding lawyers and unable to do simple arithmetic.
£100 paid into your account, followed by £101 taken out eventually leads to trouble. Repeating this, after you are in trouble creates a greater problem.
£100 paid into your account, followed by £99 taken out eventually leads to having a bigger safety margin than the overdraft that you constantly exceed.
Give up the arguments, apply some common sense, get your finances in order and start living a happier life!

Smasher

My god Whitedove, that is just fantastic!! If only you had made that post a few years ago none of this would ever have happened. I just can't believe that none of us had ever thought of it. And there we were, hundreds of thousands of consumers, government departments & all those lawyers trying to get a resolution to a situation that we thought was complex, when all we would have had to do was follow what you just wrote. Genius! I'm sure the bankers would have won the test case hands down if they had read that before.

You know, you could even have saved Northern Rock if you had given their board that speech a few years ago.

Whitedove

Smasher wrote: »

My god Whitedove, that is just fantastic!! If only you had made that post a few years ago none of this would ever have happened. I just can't believe that none of us had ever thought of it. And there we were, hundreds of thousands of consumers, government departments & all those lawyers trying to get a resolution to a situation that we thought was complex, when all we would have had to do was follow what you just wrote. Genius! I'm sure the bankers would have won the test case hands down if they had read that before.

You know, you could even have saved Northern Rock if you had given their board that speech a few years ago.

Thank you Smasher,
Education is a wonderful thing!
I would have done just as you suggested had I known that the standards had fallen so badly, over the years.
Whoever would have imagined, a few years ago, that top bankers, such as those with Northern Rock would be so foolish as to lend money to people with no income? If it had been written into a science fiction story it would have been ridiculed as beyond belief.
Anyway, now that it seems that you have seen the light, I will wish you happy savings for the future. Who knows if you follow my advice you will soon be able to transfer money from your current account into a savings account that actually pays you money.
Wouldn't that be nice!

Best wishes from Whitedove.

Nathan_Spleen

alexjohnson wrote: »

While I have an opinion - and frankly yes, I am much better qualified to have that opinion than you are, .

If you want to play the ''I know better because I'm more qualified to'' card then I would consider the opinions of a QC and a barrister whom I know personally, that have worked extensively on bank charges and they are both of the firm belief that they amount to penalties.

I'm not sure what your qualifications in law are but I suspect that in terms of legal seniority, the status of their opinions would dwarf yours.

chipbeck

Nathan_Spleen wrote: »

If you want to play the ''I know better because I'm more qualified to'' card then I would consider the opinions of a QC and a barrister whom I know personally, that have worked extensively on bank charges and they are both of the firm belief that they amount to penalties.

I'm not sure what your qualifications in law are but I suspect that in terms of legal seniority, the status of their opinions would dwarf yours.

Think Alex is some sort of novelist looking at the other thread. Probably specialises in fantasy novels.

Nathan_Spleen

Have, cake, eat.

deanh22

Irrespective of whether the charges are found to be punitive I personally believe it is every individual account holder's responsibility to know the rules and regulations of their account. I have always found a list of the charges the bank could impose on me for misoperating my account on the reverse of my bank statement. I have never not been in credit and am proud to say have never had to utilise the £1500 overdraft facility my bank gave me without even asking for it. As such I have never had any charges levied on me, however, if I was being picky the difference between what my bank could pay me in interest and what they actually do could be construed as operating charges.
In the age of internet/telephone banking no-one now needs to wait a month for their statement and can have an accurate picture of their account at any time day or night.

What the effects on all or any group of bank account holders is in the event of the OFT winning their case remains to be seen. Since the banks will seek to retain the level of their profits I cannot envisage them being painless.

IF the result of this case is the imposition of account/transaction charges on every account I will not be happy and would find it to be quite ironic given that advice has been given on IPTW to dump accounts that charge a fee as they are not worth it.

Jvic28

I suppose I would feel slightly guilty although the refund would go a long way to relieving any of that guilt. Although I can see it from the other point of view too, why should there be an end to free banking just because people spend what they haven't got.

I think everyone should be entitled to at least a basic bank account even if purely for their pay to be deposited into. Having a bank account doesn't mean you need an overdraft, credit card, cheque book etc. It should be judged on each individual.

x

snow1970

Truthbringer wrote: »

Serious question to anyone claiming back banking charges:

If you win and it causes the end of free banking (I know that's a big if) will you feel guilty?

Supplementry question:

Is anyone entitled to a bank account?

Not in the least. Also I have a bank account plus with HSBC and pay £12.95 for the privilege and still get charged through the roof. I would happily continue to pay a monthly fee if it meant that the bank charges were not so high.