Time to end free banking? Poll help needed

antrobus

opinions4u wrote: »

...Allowing banks to charge for something they currently offer for free (in return for lower charges elsewhere) will end up with two things. More resentment from consumers and bigger profits for banks...

What do you mean "Allowing banks to charge"? There's nothing to prevent them from charging should they wish to do so, and some do.

Which reminds me ...

MSE_Martin wrote: »

Time to end free banking?

Damn foolish question, if you ask me. No laws were passed making 'free banking' compulsory, no laws are going to be passed prohibiting it.

MSE_Martin wrote: »

....NOTE THIS ISNT ABOUT DISCUSSING THIS, THAT'LL COME LATER - MORE TO SEE IF THERES ANYTHING PEOPLE THINK SHOULD BE IN THE POLL BEFORE WE LAUNCH IT?...

£87m quid and he still hasn't got the hang of this interweb thing.:)

And there's no need to shout.

Zebra

RobStaffs wrote: »

Why should I pay for current account services?

Has it never occurred to you that you already are doing?

GilbertGradgrind

Is it possible to add a question asking if customers should begin to charge banks.

Yes it is at the edge of "acceptable" behaviour but it does reflect equality of contract between both parties.

When someone uses a bank call centre or branch, it costs in time. Customers' time is just as valuable as Banks' time and there is no real economic reason not to ask to be paid for your time.

I doubt it would fit into the format of the poll but could a question be asked along the lines of, "what would you charge a bank for the services they obtain from you as a customer"?

dalesrider

Lokolo wrote: »

The bank are providing a service to you, why shouldn't they charge for use of that service?

BT provide a telephone service, well if banks don't charge for their service, BT shouldn't charge me for their telephone service.

Oh public transport provide a service to me, WELL I reckon this should be free as well!

Just because something is free now doesn't mean it's fair and shouldn't change.

Competition

Offsetting no interest against no charges. Is in it's own way a charge.
I'm quite happy to get no interest on my current account to ensure I don't pay charges.
I'm sure many people have more than one bank account with diffrent banks, that are standby accounts in case of issues on another account.

Perhaps you should take up the charges with the relevent body who oversee the mentioned companies stating that banks don't charge a service fee. As such why are BT et al

antrobus

GilbertGradgrind wrote: »

...When someone uses a bank call centre or branch, it costs in time. Customers' time is just as valuable as Banks' time and there is no real economic reason not to ask to be paid for your time. ...

You can ask. Of course, the bank would also be free to close your account should they consider it uneconomic to continue providing you with a service, given the level of charges you're seeking to levy.

Lokolo

dalesrider wrote: »

Perhaps you should take up the charges with the relevent body who oversee the mentioned companies stating that banks don't charge a service fee. As such why are BT et al

Haha yes. I wonder what MSErs would think if I started shouting "Why should I pay BT for providing me with a telephone service?!!! Banks don't charge for bank accounts!"

I suspect I would get "Oh you are so stupid, they are providing you with a service so of course you should pay!"

DrSyn

My option suggestion is simple.

The goverment should bring back from the dead the best "free banking" option I ever had.

Bring Back GIROBANK !

After all it was a Conservative goverment which sold it off. So a Conservative one can bring it back.

To make it cheap for tax payers make it a simple "basic bank account" run via the telephone, Post Office and ATM. Just make sure the call centre is as good as First Direct.

antrobus

DrSyn wrote: »

...To make it cheap for tax payers ...

What do you mean "make it cheap for tax payers"? Why would it cost the taxpayer anything?

Chris55_2

I think there should be a question related to what should be provided if charging for current accounts was mandatory (which seems to be what is being suggested). How could wages or benefits be paid without incurring charges. I don't mind paying BT for a service (actually I do, which is why I just moved to someone else) but it's not a requirement for me to have a fixed telephone line. But if I can't receive money without having a bank account then charging for one just seems like a tax that is going to small group of businesses.

I'd pay for a bank account if they kept my money in a little box in the branch - but that's not what they do - they give it to people who have overdrafts and charge them a large amount for the privilege of using my money, or put it on overnight deposit with the government. So now they want me to pay for giving them the assets to make money?

ILW

I am happy for the idiots who cannot manage their finances to keep on subsidising my banking. Charges are already optional.