Yeh Nice One Martin .......... Not

krisskross

I honestly believe the banks will fight back when the dust has settled and the OFT have recommended a fair charge. I believe that the banks will charge under that sum i.e if the OFT say £12 then I believe the banks will perhaps say because they are good guys they will make it £8

However I think then they will pull the overdraft carpet from under a lot of their customers. a lot of people are already concerned about this with very good reason. So no overdraft, you bounce a few DDs @£8 each, plus the charge of another £8 for unauthorised borrowing because you can't pay back the overdraft, plus the horrendous interest on the anauthorised overdraft.

I think a huge amount of poor or just financially incompetent people are going to pay even more dearly for this reclaiming. I am sure as a customer in good standing that I will still never pay bank charges.I do not say that to be smug, I just think it is a fact.

I hope none of this happens but somehow i am sure the banks will find a way to maintain their profits. The credit card companies are recouping their losses with higher interest rates.

Taadaa

I also don't feel any pride when I say I am debt free these days as people automatically assume I am 'well off', 'snobbish', 'big headed', 'you don't know what it's like' or 'I am lucky' the list just goes on and on, there always appears to be a 'valid' excuse. It seems the debt stigma is now well and truly on the other foot [/QUOTE]

I don't think this is just about people getting into debt without a care then being 'rewarded' for it. The simple fact of the matter is, life these days is not an easy task. We are as consumers constantly bombarded with advertising, the latest so called must haves, the 'fabulous' lives of the rich and famous - getting into debt now is easier than ever, and the banks are quite happy to sit back and let us do it, and charge us ridiculous sums for the priviledge. More fool us. But too many don't realise how foolish it is until the bailiffs are knocking on the door.

But you have also mentioned that you struggled to keep your head above water - so you must know what it's like to try to makes ends meet, so struggle just for day to day living, keeping a roof over the family's head, buying food and utilities. And in that respect, those of us that don't have that kind of worry don't know how lucky we are. You seem to have been there/are. I have been there. I count my blessings now that's for sure!

No one is trying to get a free ride. A little sympathy wouldn't go amiss once in a while. Never judge someone until you have walked in their shoes and all that....

AND, well done for not getting in debt. There aren't that many people able to say that. But that doesn't make it a negative.

krisskross

The one thing i would say to anyone getting back their bank charges is to use it to pay off debt. Whether it is debt to the bank or to loans or credit cards, just reduce your debt.

scabbers

ollyk wrote:

Never quite that simple is it though? Basically you are laying the blame squarely with the bank.
With some of the attitudes on this thread I am beginning to think this country needs TOUGHER penelties for over spending and maybe we should go down the french system and make it effectively illegal to spend money you haven't got, but I guess you would all be campaining for the £30 charges back then!

And I repeat my original question. Why can the bank not later claim it's £12 x (number of charges previously claimed) back - am I missing something obvious here? Maybe it has already been ruled out and I missed it?
Anyway, forget they haven't done it yet maybe like I have said they are waiting, hell if they could potentially win this one they might as well wait for more people to claim, wait while the 'winners' spend all their money servicing debts / going on holidays etc, and when the banks come along and finally calim this money and want it now, once again they will push the people who have not yet learn't further into debt?

Actually ,YES, I do think that a LOT of people are put into a LOT of debt through these bank charges. We HAVE to have bank accounts now whether we work or not. Benefits are paid directly into bank accounts as are wages. We have NO CHOICE but to accept the T's and C's that include the charges. Most of us have no intention of getting any charges, but it happens. Do they REALLY need to be so much? We now realise the answer is NO, but because we had no choice in the first place the banks think they can get away with charging us whatever they want. We HAD to agree or NO bank account for us.

trademark

£5 ..... Martin .....

How is that going to be an incentive not to break the banks rules and regulations, how is that going to help this country halt the slide into further debt, how is that going to pay the bank to look into a defaulters abuse of a legal agreement, contact the defaulter and then monitor the situation not to mention the wasted time that could then be spent catering for other customers who are perhaps being neglected.

Automatic refunds ..... fantastic, you just get better dont you, now your dictating the situations of perhaps those who have been charged and maybe dont want to claim back their fees, yes lets run their lives for them.

What about parking tickets, speeding tickets, death tax, late tax declarations, late car tax fines, tv license fines (i could go on) are the authorities who scource these fines making a profit from the guilty who have committed these "crimes". ... YES, so when are you going to start on them, when are you going to fight for these penalties to be refunded because they are "un-lawful".

lady_noluck

trademark wrote:

How is that going to be an incentive not to break the banks rules and regulations,

I agree. £5 isn't a lot of money in the grand scheme of things. I can't wait to go overdrawn and be charged such a small amount. What fun!!!! Idiot :rolleyes2 Have you ever considered the possibility that sometimes people go overdrawn out of necessity??? For example, your wages have disappeared on bills already, your babies screaming for a fresh nappy and your cupboards are emptier than a size zero stomach. What do you do? Wrap your babys bum in kitchen roll whilst hunting for roadkill to feed your starving children??
Yes some people deliberately go over their overdraft cos they can't resist the january sales etc BUT NOT EVERYONE!! Charging £35 for going £3 over your limit doesn't help any one. If the banks really wanted to halt the countrys slide into further debt they'd do better checks on peoples financial staus BEFORE lending them any money. But then they wouldn't be able to sting them for charges and make ludicrous profits would they???

Oh and as for

trademark wrote:

parking tickets, speeding tickets, death tax, late tax declarations, late car tax fines, tv license fines (i could go on)

Stop being so overdramatic. They're a whole different ball game Prescilla!!!

IvanOpinion

MSE_Martin wrote:

It seems to me a fiver is acceptible - the academics say its a maximum £4.50. So lets take £5 as a fair fee and a round number and go with this one as a compromise figure. I hear rumours the banks are asking the OFT for £15 - £18 as a compromise which is totally unacceptible in my view

This is just simple economics and has happened many many times before. One party wants the price as low as possible, another wants it as high as possible .. therefore in this case both will probably settle for something about the £10 mark, so one side says £5 and the other says £15 .. and we all agree somewhere in the middle. By doing so though we have also given away our right to challenge such fees and the banks will probably (for the first time) take a test case to court (with the loser expected to also pick up the banks legal charges). Also, could it create a loophole where a company can charge for sending out mandatory communications? Remember the cost of issuing mandatory letters will probably be absorbed into the costs of those that can be charged for ... maybe the banks might decide to send out daily reminders .. at £10 per shot ... be careful of loopholes.

Can I also point to a (non banking) development we had to do last year. Due to a particular legal requirement a very selective mail shot had to be issued to approximately 4,000 customers. The entire development cost just over £250,000, would you therefore agree that the company would have been justified in charging the customers £60+ to receive this letter (and ensure their accounts were updated accordingly). No charge was made.

I also know of a company who sends bills out in Welsh if requested. The cost of development was millions yet they are not allowed to charge those customers extra. The real irony was that originally they sent the bills and letters out in Welsh only but because some people who demanded them could not fully understand them they now have to send them out in combined English/Welsh (more millions of development) .... duh!

I have worked for various different companies and have seen the cost of issuing simple letters, bills, invoices, statements etc. vary from about £2.50 (for bog standard pro-formas) to the above figure of £60 (not the norm I know, but there may be higher). Is £4.50, £10 or £15 a fair average .. any of them would be acceptable to me, however alongside this people will find themselves paying significantly higher interest rates.

At the minute credit is a major and growing problem in this country and anything that brings it under control is, in the long run, a better deal for everybody. So by all means fight for this but at least balance your views by making sure people know that when all is said and done the fault lies with their own lack of money management skills ... maybe the best solution for such people is to remove their credit privileges, so I would further claim the banks are right and justified in closing the accounts of people who continually can not or refuse to manage their money competently.

Ivan

Twinkly

trademark wrote:

What about parking tickets, speeding tickets, death tax, late tax declarations, late car tax fines, tv license fines (i could go on)

If Martin decided to do that then I for one would be quite happy to run up a special SuperMartin costume complete with a flowy cape and satin underpants (50's quiff and hair gel optional)

Seriously, the man is doing wonders for people with this site alone and helping thousands of people to get the help they need to challenge bank charges. Regardless of account mismanagement for whatever reason the fact is they are unlawful and we are entitled to them back.

as for "how is that going to help this country halt the slide into further debt, "

It is blindingly obvious that many many people on this site have debts that have been caused or multiplied excessively precisely because of said charges. Taking more money off me does not reduce my debt. It further does not discourage me from me from seeking further finance to cover my loss so adding to my debts. More charges = more debt not less. Reducing charges may encourage a small minority to happily keep on borrowing and bouncing but for them excessive charges arent the answer, in extreme cases debt counselling is. Have I made my point clear ? I hope so.

Lady_noluck I agree with you. I would feed my children before considering the ultimate cost of doing so every damn time but I can do without sales On that note when my daughter was a small baby (this was 1998) I went into my local branch of Abbey National to withdraw the £4 I had in the account to put towards the £1 in my purse so I could go and buy a tin of SMA baby milk. I was told at the counter they would charge me £10 for withdrawing my own money because the minimum withdrawl over the counter had to be £10. I offered to deposit £6 to make it up to £10 and they refused saying the minmum deposit accepted over the counter was, yes you guessed it, £10. At this point I was embarrassed and trying to be dignified in holding back tears. I needed that baby milk and they wouldnt give me my own money !
I was very very lucky that a customer in the queue overheard this and was outraged enough at the banks ridiculous rules to offer me £16 as a temporary loan to enable to make a deposit and a withdrawl so that I could feed my baby. I made the deposit and the withdrawl and immediately repaid the loan to the other customer. I will be eternally grateful to that person.

Note that I had money in the bank and sufficient to my needs. Under the banks rules I would have been forced to use my card to withdraw funds from the ATM and so entered into a debt incurring unauthorised charges which would then have spiralled due to my inability at the time to pay.

My experience is a prime example that you can be forced into debt, when in truth there was no need.

Twinkly

thats **withdrawal** not *withdrawl*, sorry. 1970's English education gave me fabulous spelling ability but taught me nothing about typing

Twinkly

Oooops, another mistake.

"to put towards the £1 in my purse" should read "£6". Co-incidentally, 1970's maths education did nothing for my typing