MSE News: Call to end free bank accounts

Zorz_2

benjus wrote: »

I can't see any evidence that charging for current accounts would have stopped mis-selling. What are these "other services" whose charges could come down?

My thoughts exactly. If enforced, this will only be an additional revenue stream to the banks. Who would be naive to believe that they will willingly let go some of their income? So you will end up with montly charges and everything else that exists today...

MacMickster wrote: »

Now that it is all but compulsory to operate a bank account in this country, introducing legislation insisting on charging for the privilege would be a big vote loser. Consequently this will never happen.

Exactly, nowdays you can't go very far without a bank account unless you are living in the sticks, or try to fly under the radar (conspiracy theorist, illegal immigrant, terrorist? ).

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Other than it is the REGULATOR that has said it not any bank.

Revolving doors mate, revolving doors. Not much of a regulator, when he sounds more like a lobbyist for the banking industry....;)

Gaspode

Consumerist wrote: »

Currently those with overdrafts are bearing the brunt of bank charges. It would be fairer if overdraft charges were returned to reasonable levels and we all paid our fair share for the banking services we use.....

So those people living within their means should subsidise those who are unable to? do you work for the Greek treasury?

MoneySaverLog

Consumerist wrote: »

Currently those with overdrafts are bearing the brunt of bank charges. It would be fairer if overdraft charges were returned to reasonable levels and we all paid our fair share for the banking services we use.

I am aware that this will not be a popular opinion on MSE but I say good riddance to the "free banking" lie.

I don't see how it is fairer. You're not forced to use the overdaft. Why would I want to pay bank charges for running my account in credit

Long live in credit free banking.

VT82

This guy must really have a low opinion of the banks' product pricing analysts...

If current accounts are such a loss maker, and he is sure banks are doing their analysis wrong if they can't see it like that, then why is pretty much EVERY bank DESPERATE to get you to open a current account with them???

£5 a month free for being a current account customer
£125 when you open our current account
special mortgage rates reserved for current account customers
exclusive 4.25% ISA only for our current account customers

the list goes on...

Demanding current accounts are paid for is an unpopular idea, that the banks obviously don't agree with the logic in either!

opinions4u

Lloyds pay 3% interest. Halifax give a fiver a month. Santander do upto 3% cashback. First Direct and Co op have been throwing £100 plus at new customers. Nationwide give "free" travel insurance.

But it's a totally uncompetitive market he thinks?

Silly man.

jamesd

I have three current accounts to maximise the features I get from the three banks involved. The inevitable result of fee introduction is reduced competition as I'd end up closing two of them. That'd be a clearly worse service for me and any other consumer who uses the current option to have as many current accounts as they like to get the best deals they can find.

Consumerist wrote: »

Currently those with overdrafts are bearing the brunt of bank charges. It would be fairer if overdraft charges were returned to reasonable levels and we all paid our fair share for the banking services we use.

A consumer can have an unlimited number of current accounts. The consumer can shop around for the best overdraft deal and best charges deal or can use credit card or loan deals as a cheaper form of borrowing than an overdraft.

It's trivially easy for most people to open and operate more than one current account at the moment, since there's no cost for doing so. You can even move money between them in seconds at any time of the day or night.

What's needed is more education and encouragement of consumers so that like me they realise how easy it is to have more than one account to maximise benefits.

FATBALLZ

There are 2 major issues with this

1) Letting banks make money from running accounts will not mean they will try to make less money elsewhere.
2) Ending free bank accounts when it is not possible to function in society without a bank account is not acceptable.

If this pillock gets his way I hope there are riots.

JuicyJesus

teddyco wrote: »

Didn't that chap in the 1940's with the funny little moustache already try socialism and discover that it doesn't work?

No, in fact the man with the funny little moustache murdered socialists by the thousands after ensuring they had no political influence whatsoever and then co-opting their name for a diametrically opposed political party. What he tried was called fascism and was remarkably different.

This is assuming we're talking about Hitler and not Charlie Chaplin here, although someone who thinks Hitler was a socialist is probably not able to tell the difference.

BlondBoy

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Andrew Bailey ? Never heard of him - he must have been effective - not !

Open your wallet, have a look at any reasonably recent notes in there and check who's signed them...

andy_allblack

Thirty years ago, a large portion of the population were paid in cash, you could still pay your bills over the counter with a cheque or cash, benefits, didn't require a bank account, if there is an end to free banking, lets have a choice of wage packets, benefit books and paying bills without using DD facilities. Imagine a pensioner, having his or her pension paid into a bank account, six pound monthly fee withdrawn straight away!!!!!!! The richer get richer, poorer get poorer, what a country.