Time to end free banking? Poll help needed

innovate

opinions4u wrote: »

On my next trip to Tesco it will look something like:

Use of private road into the car park: 50p in. 50p out.
Use of car park: £1.20 an hour.
Trolley hire: £1.00 an hour.
Aisle use: 10p an aisle capped at £1.50 per visit.
Checkout charge 75p a visit (40p self service with a 25p charge for manual help).
Customer service desk: 50p per conversation.

Cost of goods cut by 4% across the board to compensate. With the reintroduction of double Clubcard points!

Is that better for the consumer?

Truth be told, Tescos have always had all those charges (and more) priced into their current prices. That's an integral part of what made them such a successful company.

Same for banks, all their costs (buildings, staff, risks etc etc) are already reflected in their offerings.

I bet they'd all love to make us think that by

• listing costs already included in what we are paying [without telling us that they are],
• then giving us 50% (or thereabouts) back of such costs and telling us we got a great deal

they are more trustworthy and desirable than what we had in the past.

I think that, regrettably, many people will fall for the hype.

rmg1

antrobus wrote: »

Erm yes it is. It'll be in that clause that says what you're getting is an 'account'. An account with a bank is just like an acount with anybody else; merely a bookkeeping record of a debt that's due from one party to another. If all you wanted to do was for the bank to look after your money then you should have asked for a safety deposit box.

So where does it say that they can use my money as they see fit?
Where does it say that they can loan my money to other people?

opinions4u

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Free current account banking is a major disincentive to new entrants in the retail banking sector. As the cost has to be recovered from somewhere and someone.

Possibly the only good argument in favour of changing the status quo.

But even then, there is a far bigger disincentive to entering the current account market.

Regulatory capital requirements. That goes way beyond any cross-subsidisation costs that a new player has to meet.

System

opinions4u wrote: »

Use of car park: £1.20 an hour.
Checkout charge 75p a visit (40p self service with a 25p charge for manual help).
...
Cost of goods cut by 4% across the board to compensate. With the reintroduction of double Clubcard points!
Is that better for the consumer?

Yes, it would be. Particularly for people like me who cycle to the supermarket! Supermarket car parks are not free, of course: all customers pay for them at the checkout, to a random extent, and they sterilize huge tracts of land that could be used for housing or left for the badgers to enjoy.

Hooloovoo

YoungNick wrote: »

and they sterilize huge tracts of land that could be used for housing or left for the badgers to enjoy.

They could be, yes. And then when the supermarket closes down because no one visits, the badgers could enjoy that as well.

People talk about the "decline of the high street" but no one ever seems to actually do anything about the main problem, that being there is nowhere to park when you get there.

antrobus

rmg1 wrote: »

So where does it say that they can use my money as they see fit?
Where does it say that they can loan my money to other people?

Because it's stops being your money the minute you pay into your account and becomes the bank's. That, legally speaking, is what a bank account is.

antrobus

opinions4u wrote: »

Possibly the only good argument in favour of changing the status quo.

But even then, there is a far bigger disincentive to entering the current account market.

Regulatory capital requirements. That goes way beyond any cross-subsidisation costs that a new player has to meet.

It's only EURO 5 million to get a banking licence. That's not a lot of money if you're thinking of entering the PCA market. It would probably cost you that to build the data centre and get all the interfaces with BACS, Visa, SWIFT etc up and running.

But why would you want to spend all that money on launching a product which you then can't charge for?

rmg1

antrobus wrote: »

Because it's stops being your money the minute you pay into your account and becomes the bank's. That, legally speaking, is what a bank account is.

Pardon?
So I give some cash to my other half to hold for me.
Does it then become her money and not mine?

antrobus

rmg1 wrote: »

Pardon?
So I give some cash to my other half to hold for me.
Does it then become her money and not mine?

If you give some cash to your other half to 'hold for you' then it remains your money. If, on the other hand, you lend her the money, it becomes hers to do with as she pleases; she merely has to repay that money at some later date in accordance with whatever you've agreed. When you deposit money in a bank account, you are lending that money to the bank, and it similarly becomes theirs to do with as they please etc. Like I said before, if all you wanted was for the bank to keep your money for you, you should have got a safety deposit box.

Hooloovoo

antrobus wrote: »

If you give some cash to your other half to 'hold for you' then it remains your money. If, on the other hand, you lend her the money, it becomes hers to do with as she pleases; she merely has to repay that money at some later date in accordance with whatever you've agreed. When you deposit money in a bank account, you are lending that money to the bank, and it similarly becomes theirs to do with as they please etc. Like I said before, if all you wanted was for the bank to keep your money for you, you should have got a safety deposit box.

Indeed. The only reason you get paid any interest at all on money in the bank is as compensation for the risk you are taking by lending them the money.