A brave new world of banking

dchurch24

that's £102,000,000 a year

so, not a loss leader then?

dchurch24

In a capitalist world - a company can never make enough profit. The more profit - the better off the shareholders are and the happier they are.

A capitalist world still has laws that ALL must abide by. Banks included.

Because they have been forced (or will be soon) to abide with the law, they are deciding to punish the worse off in society (in this case those on less than £24k per year).

As we are forced into having a bank account by legislation, this is almost a breach of the ECHR regs. If all banks do this, then it WILL be a serious breach.

MPH80

dchurch24 wrote:

so, not a loss leader then?

You don't actually read the posts you're responding to do you?

MPH80 wrote:

Let's be clear - HSBC made it quite clear that the £1.05 is from their PERSONAL BANKING PRODUCTS - not their current accounts.

Personal banking products include:

Credit cards
Loans
Mortgages
Savings
Current Accounts

Where do you think that £1.05 a week comes from? I'll give you a clue - it's not the last two on average.

M.

honey_bee1384

dchurch24 wrote:

In my opinion, yes.

It's the only language banks respond to. Fighting back.

I totally agree. FD need to be shown they cant get away with it. I think i will be on the hunt for another bank to have an account with at the weekend.

oldfella

The question is; banks exist to make a profit, and only to do so.

---

I think you need to consider that individuals like me are here to make a profit to. I do what is in my interest - paying someone more than I need to for a service is not in my interest.

Mike

gt94sss2

dchurch24 wrote:

If they acted fairly and made *only* 8-9 billion, would that be such a bad thing?

You do realise that most of the money that HSBC makes:

a) Does not come from current accounts
b) Does not even come from the UK, but its operations abroad

In fact, only around 30% of its profits come from the whole of Europe (which under their definition seems to include the UK, France, Germany, Switzerland and Turkey + others)

Regards
Sunil

katskorner

I have been with first direct for many many years - pretty much when they first appeared and I have two current accounts and a rubbish paying savings account that I use for day to day bits and pieces.

I do not pay £1500 into these accounts each month anymore as I am now a stay-at-home mom.

I object most strongly to these charges and now I may be forced to close my accounts and lose my banking history because of this. I think it is incredibly cheeky of the bank to do this. I am most unhappy that I am likely to be forced to move.

loneranger

But we are forced to have bank accounts in order to lead a normal life--the banks are ruling our lives. It has to stop somewhere!!!

purplehappy_sammy

We pay £1350 into our first direct account each month. Therefore £150 short of limit and would be charged the£10. I refuse to open a savings account with them to save this money so out of principle I have just applied for another bank account
One customer first direct have lost (customer since 1999!)
Others should follow suit.

nearlyrich

I had another chat with FD today about my position and it appears that they are really trying to get rid of inactive accounts they have put up a FAQ on their site here. katskorner I think you will be OK as you have a savings account.

I was really annoyed when I heard about it but now I have all the facts I completely understand, they have great service and running currrent accounts costs them money especially if the account is almost dormant. They want people to use that account as their main current account, which I do, and if they don't they are using the charge as an "incentive" to close the account. I am a money saver I won't be paying any charges to FD for something I could get free elsewhere but I won't close a perfectly good bank account because of this. It's like closing it because they charge for First Directory, I don't need it so I don't have it.