Do you agree with reclaiming CC charges?

student100

Fungas wrote:

This analogy is pretty accurate: if a mugger walked up to you and said "I'm going to punch you in the face and steal your wallet", and then did it, they would be no less culpable just because they'd warned you.

It's not quite like that. More like:

Mugger: If you stay there, you'll be fine. If you throw stones at me, I'm going to punch you in the face and steal your wallet.

You: throw a stone at the mugger.


Now OK, in this situation, the mugger is still partly to blame, but your actions could still have avoided the outcome.


You have a choice not to put yourself in the situation where you get charged by the bank, but you do it anyway...

jamalfatty

student100 wrote:

You have a choice not to put yourself in the situation where you get charged by the bank, but you do it anyway...

Not everyone has a choice. These charges affect those on low incomes more than any other demographic group, people might not be living beyond there means but sometimes they will go over limits or pay things late etc, sometimes unavoidably. If you had a choice of buying food or going hungry as it would mean straying over your limit ever so slightly, what would you do?

MPH80

jamalfatty wrote:

Not everyone has a choice. These charges affect those on low incomes more than any other demographic group, people might not be living beyond there means but sometimes they will go over limits or pay things late etc, sometimes unavoidably. If you had a choice of buying food or going hungry as it would mean straying over your limit ever so slightly, what would you do?

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Sorry ... had to do that ... because I'd going to have to repeat myself again.

Do you really believe that we didn't have people on low incomes BEFORE unauthorised overdrafts?

There is a VERY simple way around it if you can't afford the charges - which the demographics you're talking about can't.

You work in cash. Your pay goes into the bank account, you go to the bank on that day ... you withdraw all of your salary (or all of your salary minus direct debit amounts) - put it under the matress and spend the cash.

Oddly - no cash = no spending = no chance of going overdrawn.

If you can't afford to live month to month on the income you have with the outgoings you have - then you have a far bigger problem than a £30 charge.

M.

tom188

The_Boss wrote:

To be honest, that forum makes me sick due to people celebrating their own stupidty/incompetence, so I avoid it.

Me to. Those who claim back interest on top is particularly galling, as they seem to be able to claim rates far above what a careful money manager could have got on their savings. There seems to be absolutely no reason to be careful with money at the moment you can be as reckless and careless as you want then "claim it all back", regardless how stupid you have been.

But they will all get stung again as the banks ramp up interest rates to 30-40% to get their money back, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

I thought this thread would turn out to be a hot potato...

jamalfatty

Of course there were people on low incomes before unauthorised overdrafts.

How many businesses these days though pay there staff in cash? Very few, a bank account is more or less a necessity these days.

I totally agree that if your expenditure is more than your income you have a very real problem, but only if this is regularly, for some people it may be a one-off which is where problems start.

MPH80

How many businesses these days though pay there staff in cash? Very few, a bank account is more or less a necessity these days.

Which is why you simply go to the bank once a month to withdraw the money - I'm not unrealtistic about that.

for some people it may be a one-off which is where problems start

Which is what an emergency fund is for ... even if it's just £10 a month - it's worth it isn't it?

I'm going to keep saying this - people coped with one off expenses before unauthorised overdraft - which means people can cope now without incurring charges. The mechanisms haven't gone away!

M.

Fungas

student100 wrote:

It's not quite like that. More like:

Mugger: If you stay there, you'll be fine. If you throw stones at me, I'm going to punch you in the face and steal your wallet.

You: throw a stone at the mugger.


Now OK, in this situation, the mugger is still partly to blame, but your actions could still have avoided the outcome.


You have a choice not to put yourself in the situation where you get charged by the bank, but you do it anyway...

OK; going back to an actual occurance... one of my direct debits was due out on a particular Monday. The firm took the money on the previous Friday. I wasn't to know that they were going to do that; they don;t tell me if they;re going to take the money early. The bank paid out despite the fact I didn;t have funds available. Had they not, I;d have stayed in the black and the firm would have claimed the cash on Monday, the proper day; and been paid.

I went overdrawn. The bank then charged me £30 for being OD.

In my mind, I tried to avoid "throwing the stone"; in fact, it was thrown for me! The bank, not being of sound mind, chose to sting me for far more than I went overdrawn. Rather than me have a claim against the charge, the money was taken immedaitely before I could say "wait!!!".

OK; since then (around three or four years ago), charges are paid at the end of the month and my particular bank does allow for appeals. They actually offer up to 3 refunds in a year. My quesiton now would be, if you;re so sure that what you're doing is lawful, why offer refunds? Would I go back to a shop and say, thanks for the clothes I;ve bought over the last year; I now want the value of 3 items back? No. Because what they're all doing is not lawful, and they know it!

Whether I;m a bad money manager for letting myself ever get into the position of being charged by a bank for defaulting is neither here nor there; these charges are *illegal* under English and Welsh law; somebody has been syphoning off my cash and I want it back!!

ictmad

people should always have a £100 overdraft then if above happens it isnt a problem

Fungas

aj3001 wrote:

All interesting replies, the thing that really gets to me is the fact that this doesn't happen anywhere else, its like driving for example, think of the uproar if you speed, get caught, get 3 points, 6 months later you write a letter and get the points taken off! Wheres the sense of discipline? How are you supposed to teach?

If this approach is applied to many other "disciplinary" actions in life people would hate it and argue over it, like the driving example I mentioned, or if your a parent, your child gets 6 hours worth of detentions in 6 years, then they go and take a day off to get the 6 hours back? Would that be fair? No

It's all about what is lawful and what isn't.

It is lawful for a bank to cover their administrative costs by making a charge. It's is not lawful for a bank to make a profit from those charges.

It is also not lawful to break the speed limit. Why are people painting the banks as being the victims here? They are the speed limit breakers!

Finally, it's the banks position as custodians of your cash that "allows" them to take this money, and really, as much of it as they wish. You have no control over it. This is tantamount to a speeding, parking or traffic fine; however, for those, you are allowed the rught of reply and to appeal. With these charges, you're not; they just get "removed" from your account whether you are at fault or not.

Fungas

ictmad wrote:

people should always have a £100 overdraft then if above happens it isnt a problem

Fine if your payment is lower than £100; not relevant if your payment is above £100. If your payment is for £101 and you're at 0, then you'll go over your overdraft limit and, in my bank, get stung for £30 even if a) it's over a weekend, b) you could do nothing to stop the payment going out, even though it was early.

In my mind, the direct debitting system has been a license for banks to print money; no wonder they want everyone paying by direct debit, and no wonder they have financial interests in utility companies. More defaulting direct debitors that they can prey upon.