HSBC charge for overdraft review if overdrawn in previous 6 months

leemarquis

HSBC did their annual review of my overdraft and charged £25 for doing so because I had gone over my agreed limit in the 6 months prior to the review.

This seems very unfair as I was already charged £25 for going over at the time and so to be charged for the review - which is not charged for normally - simply because I went over in the previous 6 months effectively means I am being charged twice for the same thing.

To show how unfair this is - if two HSBC customers went over their agreed limit once each in the year, one of them 10 months before their overdraft review and one of them 5 months before their review, then the former would only incur one £25 charge while the latter would incur two £25 charges.

Is that fair? What is the significance of the 6 months prior to the review?

LauraWxx

They did this some time ago with First Direct accounts who are a part of HSBC. At that time I had a £50 o/d. I rang them up and they cancelled the charges as I requested my overdraft to be reduced to £0.

It is worth calling them to see if they can do anything about it. Not saying they are obliged to, First Direct were not obliged to, but was well worth the call.

leemarquis

Already phoned them and they said they won't remove the charge as it's in their terms. The woman I spoke to agreed that I was effectively being charged for going over my limit twice. I just dont see what the previous 6 months has to do with it...

le_loup

Not only do they tell you about this in their T&Cs but they write to you and tell you EVERY year.
Unfair it may be, but you knew about it and signed up for it.
Sorry if this is not what you want to hear.

leemarquis

le_loup wrote: »

Not only do they tell you about this in their T&Cs but they write to you and tell you EVERY year.
Unfair it may be, but you knew about it and signed up for it.
Sorry if this is not what you want to hear.

Thanks - that is exactly what I DID want to hear - that you think it is unfair. Of course the info is in their terms for me to read, but Im just trying to find out if anyone thinks this is a fair way of applying a charge for the review. It just seems quit arbitrary, charging some and not others when there may be no difference between the amount or number of times they went over their limit - ie it seems unfair to have this 6 month policy. Surely the charge should apply to everyone or no one.

Lokolo

leemarquis wrote: »

Thanks - that is exactly what I DID want to hear - that you think it is unfair. Of course the info is in their terms for me to read, but Im just trying to find out if anyone thinks this is a fair way of applying a charge for the review. It just seems quit arbitrary, charging some and not others when there may be no difference between the amount or number of times they went over their limit - ie it seems unfair to have this 6 month policy. Surely the charge should apply to everyone or no one.

I don't think it is unfair because you should have known this was the case by reading the T&Cs.

If it hasn't been in the T&Cs... then I'd agree that it is unfair.

innovate

HSBC put their T&Cs to you upfront - you have a choice to accept or decline them.

You have accepted them at the time you signed up for the account, so even if you consider these T&Cs outrageous/injust/immoral etc one you really comprehend them, you cannot turn round later, when the T&Cs get exercised, and cry they are "unfair".

Stand up to the commitments you made, and move your banking elsewhere if you don't agree any longer with the HSBC T&Cs. Read the new bank's T&Cs carefully, though - - overdrafts are always expensive, regardless of which bank you have them with,

leemarquis

Lokolo wrote: »

I don't think it is unfair because you should have known this was the case by reading the T&Cs.

If it hasn't been in the T&Cs... then I'd agree that it is unfair.

Just because something is in the terms and conditions does not automatically make it fair. There are plenty of unfair terms in contracts and as no one can seem to offer an explanation for the six month rule it would seem this is one of them.

opinions4u

Perhaps they should just call the overdraft in. As is their right.

It's fair, from the point of view that they tell you up front. You have to take an action to trigger the charge - mismanage your account.

They don't have to offer you any overdraft limit at all. You want it, they charge for it, so you pay for it.

leemarquis wrote: »

Just because something is in the terms and conditions does not automatically make it fair. There are plenty of unfair terms in contracts and as no one can seem to offer an explanation for the six month rule it would seem this is one of them.

Is it unfair? Stay in your limit, get an automated renewal. Abuse your limit and it may well require a manual intervention to make a lending decision. Adding to costs. Putting you into a higher risk category than those who run their accounts better.

You have a right to challenge it under unfair contracts legislation. Go for it.

Personally I think it's an overt charge for a service where providing you with that service costs more.

So why is it unfair?

leemarquis

But why the arbitrary six month rule? Surely I should still get the same charge if it happens seven months before the review? I'd be happy paying it if I knew it was being implemented the same to anyone across the board and not just those within the six months before their review.

Lokolo

leemarquis wrote: »

But why the arbitrary six month rule? Surely I should still get the same charge if it happens seven months before the review? I'd be happy paying it if I knew it was being implemented the same to anyone across the board and not just those within the six months before their review.

If you do it past the 6 months I believe the charge is there and then. So Months 1-6 you get charged there and then, months 7-12 you get charged on 12th month.