Halifax Credit Card Revenge??

peawack

tom188 wrote: »

Your comments seem more of a personal attack than a response to Clariman's argument. If you have a counter argument by all means post it, if you just want to be rude and make ill informed remarks go somewhere else.

Hello Tom188,
Why so sensitive ? I thought this was an adult and serious debate. Are you advocating censorship by your remarks ? Now that IS rude.
You seem to have missed the points I made in response to Clariman's lecture to the OP. Was it the red mist ? These charges are not 'potentially unlawful', they are positively, definitely, certainly illegal. Ask Martin Lewis !
Secondly, they have not been 'removed'. I will not apologise for my remarks about the people who regard charge-legality campaigners as a nuisances.
Then there are people who advertise their own websites..............

Clariman

peawack wrote: »

Hello Tom188 ...
You seem to have missed the points I made in response to Clariman's lecture to the OP.

Talking of "missing points", I didn't see you make any points whatsoever in response to my detailed answer to your original post.

Was it the red mist ? These charges are not 'potentially unlawful', they are positively, definitely, certainly illegal. Ask Martin Lewis !

Please show where these cards have been proven to be illegal.

Then there are people who advertise their own websites..............

I take it that was a dig at me. I'm not into criticising people on discussion forums nor into personal attacks - it is pretty unproductive. You will notice that my original post in this thread didn't actual criticise people for claiming back bank charges, but perhaps you choose not to see that.

Clariman

tom188

CREDIT CARD FEES ARE NOT ILLEGAL
They never have been described as such by anyone who understands the subject. To describe them as illegal demonstrates a lack of knowledge of what the word illegal means. It is not against the law to set charges such as this.

They could be described as UNLAWFUL
However as far as I am aware there has never been a precedent set regarding the charges they are POTENTIALLY UNLAWFUL.

Hence my comment on ill informed remarks.

Clariman

Just been checking the "illegality" question out. This press release from the Office of Fair Trading is the one that concerns credit card charges. It states their view that the high charges are probably unlawful but proposes a compromise of setting a maximum of £12 per item.

Specifically ...

Where credit card default charges are set at more than £12, the OFT will presume that they are unfair, and is likely to challenge the charge unless there are limited, exceptional business factors in play. A default charge is not fair simply because it is below £12. Setting a threshold for intervention is a pragmatic pro-consumer action that is designed to give the industry the opportunity to change its practice without litigation. It is supported by detailed guidance to the industry as to how to reduce the likelihood of public enforcement (see note 2).

So the OFT has expressed a view that they are unlawful but it has not been proven to be the case in a court of law. Therefore, I think that the term "potentially unlawful" is pretty accurate.

Clariman

YorkshireBoy

peawack wrote: »

These charges are not 'potentially unlawful', they are positively, definitely, certainly illegal. Ask Martin Lewis !

Martin Lewis will tell you that they are NOT illegal. Indeed, he was criticised on the 'reclaiming charges' board recently for agreeing with Jeremy Vine (on his radio show) that they were illegal. Martin replied, on thread, stating that if he did 'agree' they were illegal it was clearly a mistake on his behalf.

Then there are people who advertise their own websites..............

Martin Lewis "supports and sponsors" stoozing.com. I would imagine that this is because it fits with his 'revenge' approach. As an aside, there are a great many people on this board who have benefited from (the advertising of) the service that stoozing.com provides - not only those who use it to MAKE money, but also many people who use it to SAVE money.

Your personal attack on Clariman is therefore totally uncalled for in my opinion, and lends absolutely nothing to the thread topic, or MSE in general.

DIBS9130

peawack wrote: »

Hello Tom188,
These charges are not 'potentially unlawful', they are positively, definitely, certainly illegal. Ask Martin Lewis !.

Sorry, you are wrong.

To the OP. As another poster has said, you don't have the 'right' to borrow money, so whilst you and others may feel that reducing your limit is unfair its certainly not discrimination and a business decision on their part.

I would just apply for a card elsewhere and stop using Halifax if you feel strongly about it to protest. I would sincerely doubt you'd have any case if you decided to complain with the F.O.

regularsaver1

wacko911 wrote: »

The banking code does not agree.

In fact banking ombudsman would like to know about this kind of behaviour. They have wrapped a few knuckes of banks for closing peoples accounts because they reclaimed what was lawfully theirs.

Report them

Report them for what?

They have not taken the credit card away totally

Could I report a credit card lender because I haven't used my card for 12 months, so they write to tell me that they are reducing my limit, that was reserved for me to make way for other applicants, and then they intend to close

No, because that is how business works

peawack

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

Martin Lewis will tell you that they are NOT illegal. Indeed, he was criticised on the 'reclaiming charges' board recently for agreeing with Jeremy Vine (on his radio show) that they were illegal. Martin replied, on thread, stating that if he did 'agree' they were illegal it was clearly a mistake on his behalf.

Martin Lewis "supports and sponsors" stoozing.com. I would imagine that this is because it fits with his 'revenge' approach. As an aside, there are a great many people on this board who have benefited from (the advertising of) the service that stoozing.com provides - not only those who use it to MAKE money, but also many people who use it to SAVE money.

Your personal attack on Clariman is therefore totally uncalled for in my opinion, and lends absolutely nothing to the thread topic, or MSE in general.

The word 'illegal' has been removed from the 'Bank Charges' article on the home page of this site within the last 48 hours !