obtaining credit - insanity

Dan:_4

ManicMum wrote: »

I am very surprised by the way people have jumped on you here White Horse.

Because he likes to make out he's a financial expert: How would someone so clued up in the world of finance get a £25 fine, be refused an instant decision for a mere £100 when having significant savings with the same institution?

Sorry, but it just don't add up - i suspect the white horse is on a wind up - the clue is how he cleverly inserted this line into his OP:

If this is a sign of things to come, then the housing market will plummet.

[Deleted User]

The_White_Horse wrote: »

they have done so. but THAT WAS NOT MY F**KING POINT. do people not understand this???????????????? I was not complaining about the fee (unhappy as I was at incurring it).

It was the ridiculous interview to get 100 credit buffer zone established.

Ah bless, your too important and your pride won't stand a 15 minute interview. But you're prepared to spend more than 15 minutes on here discussing it with people who can do nothing about it.

Take your fragile ego and obnoxious attitude somewhere else.

dlk

White Horse, as a man of means I wondered if you'd lend me £100 please?....What, you want to ask me some questions first?????...How unreasonable!!!!!!!!!


First Directs overdraft processing actually just takes a few seconds but if the request is declined by the system they then go through the full assessment so that a more human judgemental decision can be made.

To lend anything, even a pound they will go through the exact same questioning if you aren't an automatic accept by the system. If the regulators turn up and choose to investigate your lending history they have to justify there decision to agree your overdraft. They can't just say "well it was only £100", they have to show that they have taken a responsible attitude to your lending decision.

sveika

Halifax is pretty good, you don't need to go for an interview to increase your overdraft. You can do it online by yourself and the new overdraft can take effect immediately.

bendix

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i give up on this thread. i am extremely disappointed by bendix. he has let me down most of all. i used to value his opinion. now i realise it is worthless.

i cannot understand how anyone on here (bar public sector) can think a 15 minute interview for 100 quid overdraft is not OTT and excessive. It should take no more than 3 seconds for existing customers. yes or no. that is it.

i await bendix to give me the list of banks that don't do this, so i can use my free choice to join one of those instead.

I could give a fig about your disappointment.

You position yourself on here as some kind of champion of individual responsibility, and yet this is your second post complaining about the banks lending policies. Curiously, you only complain when it affects you.

I, at least, am consistent and if I made a basic cashflow error, I would take it on the chin. Frankly, I would also applaud the banks' new-found stringent approach to lending to people who have demonstrated that they have a history of going overdrawn and thus could potentially be high risk to extend more credit too.

Isn't that precisely what you and I have been railing about on here for the last couple of years.

A very weak thread White Horse, and one that reveals more about your philosophical standpoint than I suspect you wanted. I am as hard as nails on personal responsibility, yet I live it myself. You seem to think it only applies to everyone else, except yourself.

The_White_Horse

what is actually very telling is all the self assured answers - such as "it doesn't add up" "a man of means never goes overdrawn".

it just clearly shows that these people actually have no clue what is going on. I guess the world is easy for those with one salary (PAYE deducted), one account, a few direct debits and not much else on. ahhh, those were the days.

my real point though, which no one (bar one person) seems to understand is that I have no problem with incurring the charge. that was merely explaining the story. i shall say that again, just for the few remaining morons in the room - I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CHARGE - WHILST I AM OF COURSE NOT HAPPY TO BE CHARGED (and they have since dropped it) I REALISE I WENT OVER THE LIMIT AND THAT IS THAT. That is not and was not ever what I was moaning about. So all the clever talk of "sort out your finances" really is a non sequitor.

The point is, as an existing customer, with lots of savings in the bank, a request for a 100 buffer zone should not require a 15 minute interview. It should be an instant yes or no. I don't care if it is "no" - as long as I don't have to waste my time telling them what deductions come out of my salary at source etc etc.

If I constantly was overdrawn, had no savings with them - i could possibly understand it. Even then, it should be an instant yes or no. People should be pre-approved up to a grand or something.

Nikel

Not only should everyone be pre-approved for a grand, they should roll out the red carpet whenever a man of significant means comes in. Hire a marching band to play him in too!

The_White_Horse

bendix wrote: »

I could give a fig about your disappointment.

You position yourself on here as some kind of champion of individual responsibility, and yet this is your second post complaining about the banks lending policies. Curiously, you only complain when it affects you.

I, at least, am consistent and if I made a basic cashflow error, I would take it on the chin. Frankly, I would also applaud the banks' new-found stringent approach to lending to people who have demonstrated that they have a history of going overdrawn and thus could potentially be high risk to extend more credit too.

Isn't that precisely what you and I have been railing about on here for the last couple of years.

A very weak thread White Horse, and one that reveals more about your philosophical standpoint than I suspect you wanted. I am as hard as nails on personal responsibility, yet I live it myself. You seem to think it only applies to everyone else, except yourself.

Yet again you have failed to understand the most simple basic point. are you !!!!!! in some way???????

I have not complained about the charges, and accept responsibility for going overdrawn. My only complaint was the stupidity of such a long and drawn out process to get a 100 quid over draft. That is all I am complaining about - what has that got to do with personal repsonsibility????

they have my details - they see the income that comes in, goes out, how much savings i have - so why the interview? what purpose? i will not be telling them anything they cannot see for themselves. It is pointless admin. As i say - i don't care if they reject the request - AS LONG AS THEY DO IT INSTANTLY.

do you understand this? or do you STILL think i have a problem about the charge for going overdrawn? Maybe as this is the umpteenth explanation you may have now grasped it.

ILW

They want you in to try and flog you savings plans, investments etc. The OD is just an excuse.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

The_White_Horse wrote: »

My only complaint was the stupidity of such a long and drawn out process to get a 100 quid over draft.

The appointment was an opportunity for them to try and flog you some other products, as two recent overdraft charges have probably triggered an alert. If you'd requested an overdraft before you went over your limit it would probably have ony taken a few minutes over the phone.

Banks make money from loans/credit cards/fees from customers who can't manage their money- your going over your limit flags you up as just such an income source, even though you may also have savings with them.

It's a very simple business model. Probably even a public sector worker could understand it.

Edit to add; it certainly wouldn't be cost effective for them to conduct lengthy interviews with every overdraft request; only those they see could be profitable for them. Afraid you've got "mug punter" stamped on your file.