Don't blame the campaigners for the end of free banking Blog Discussion

cnoelj

jock1960 wrote: »

Well said HACZ.

It really p's me off that we will all end up suffering because of the actions of the irresponsible minority who can't (and in a lot of cases won't) budget. I know someone who TWICE ran up debts of over £30,000 on overdrafts and credit/store cards (on a salary of £15,000 p.a.). On both occasions she entered into an IVA with her creditors and ended up paying back a fraction of the amount she had 'borrowed', although in my view 'theft' would be a more appropriate word.

Anyone who doesn't play by the rules, and that includes people who exceed their overdraft limit, deserves to be charged £20 or £30 a time as this is probably an accurate reflection of the cost involved to the bank. It is not just a case of popping a letter in an envelope to the customer, there is the initial examination of the account to determine why it has exceeded the limit, the decision on what action to take, the dictation of a letter, the typing and signing of a letter and then the postage for sending it, not to mention the banks other costs such as premises, electricity etc.

What a lot of people seem to forget is that banks are not a charity. They are in business to make money and if you don't like it, keep your money under the mattress and pay for everything in cash!

£35 for going a pound or two over the agreed limit? Perhaps because their was a !!!! up with salaries. People ought to take more responsibility but banks ought to be responsible and accountable too. Their intransigent attitudes do not make good business sense and if they are really interested in building bridges with the public really need to be much more transparent and less greedy.

You say it is not just about popping a letter into an envelope. The whole issue is about banks refusing to say what their true costs are. That is one of the reasons why they dont go to court, as this information will be demanded from them.

Edinburghlass_2

From Martin's article...

• Imagine you go over your overdraft once and are then charged fines for bounced cheques and direct debits. This leaves you £100 down, a sum you can’t afford to repay, leading to more fines the next month, and so it continues, snowballing. This tragic scenario can put people thousands in debt for one simple mistake (read one woman’s story in my blog).

Absolutely delighted to read Chrissie's success story some time after Martin wrote the above blog.

SaverSavvy_3

Yes, I will be blaming the campaigners if there is an end to free banking. I too am peed off with all this reclaiming hysteria. I have never had to pay a bank charge and do not give a monkeys if the banks impose them. It is enough of a deterrent for me and I therefore act responsibly.

And Martin, yes, it IS free banking. I get a cheque book, debit card, statements, direct debits and standing orders all free of charge. In fact, my bank pays me! Alright it might not be much but it is better than what we were getting a few years ago which was nothing. I am happy with the current arrangement. Stay in credit and you get a free account in exchange. Use the bank's money, and you pay a charge. What's wrong with that? As a business they can charge what they like. Surely its up to the customer to be responsible and/or shop around for a decent overdraft deal/loan etc.

Shame on all of you who are unable to manage your finances. Its gonna cost us all in the long run.

john1950

Why is it that these Martin types side with the stupid people, those who choose not to be careful with their finances and so get penalised.

What about those of us who choose not to join the inept by being sensible with our finances and living within our means. Any idiot can spend more than they have, any idiot can run up debts which their own common sense should tell them they will have problems paying back.

I have never paid bank charges because I have chosen not to. This requires some effort to live within your means and yes, it can be difficult at times and it can be boring.

I am quite happy with my banking arrangements and now that charges have been reduced I am quite happy for the banks to charge the careless.

As Morse might say"Lewis, you haven't thought this through"!!

System

There is a quote at the top of the page that says:

'Please be nice to all MoneySavers. There?s no such thing as a stupid question, and even if you disagree courtesy helps.'

On a personal level can i just say, out of courtesy for Martin and the site, can we refrain from using personal insults.

Arni_2

Try going into a shop and persistently taking something that's not yours and see what happens if you get caught. I don't see the difference between this and taking money that's not yours from a bank, ie drawing funds when you don't have them, don't have an overdraft arrangement or are up to the limit!

rygon

I agree that there are people out there who cannot live within their means and will take loads of overdrafts, store credit without thinking of the consequences. To me this is wrong and shouldnt be allowed. Its up to the individual to be stronger with their budget, but at the same time the banks shouldnt be offering them all tese loans etc.

With regards to the fine for going over the limit. I have been a customer with halifax for 8 years now and this year is the 1st time i have ever used my overdraft. Ive decided to redecorate my bathroom and have been using the money in my current account to pay for most of this. When down close to my limit a derect debit came out for my mortgage bring me £1.24 over my limit. I noticed this after 2 days and brought it back up by moving some money from my saving account (with halifax as well). Now is it fair that I have been fined £30 for this????? I think not and will be ringing them up when i have time, to get my money back.

MSE_Martin

Just to reiterate for those saying people are taking the banks money without permission. This isn't true - its not without permission its unauthorised.

As I write in my blog

"Banks don’t have to pay bounced cheques. The idea ‘people are unfairly taking the banks money’ is nonsense. Banks have two limits when you go beyond your authorised overdraft; the ‘paid’ and ‘unpaid’ limit. This means internally they allow you to keep taking money out up to a further limit. The system is designed this way so that they can levy these profitable fees."

The banks could not pay the money, but they choose to have a 'paid' limit as its profitable for them to do so. If the banks didn't want people to do this they could simply have a straight 'unpaid' limit; they don't because having a paid limit creates over £1 billion in unlawful penalty charges for them.

Martin

HACZ

MSE_Martin wrote: »

Just to reiterate for those saying people are taking the banks money without permission. This isn't true - its not without permission its unauthorised.

As I write in my blog

"Banks don’t have to pay bounced cheques. The idea ‘people are unfairly taking the banks money’ is nonsense. Banks have two limits when you go beyond your authorised overdraft; the ‘paid’ and ‘unpaid’ limit. This means internally they allow you to keep taking money out up to a further limit. The system is designed this way so that they can levy these profitable fees."

The banks could not pay the money, but they choose to have a 'paid' limit as its profitable for them to do so. If the banks didn't want people to do this they could simply have a straight 'unpaid' limit; they don't because having a paid limit creates over £1 billion in unlawful penalty charges for them.

Martin

A book of 30 cheques with a £100 guarantee card can and often does result in people being able to take £3000 and the bank can do nothing!
Additionally banks have a floor limit under which payments are not fully scrutinised. Imagine the additional costs that would be involved if all payments had to be referred to your bank before they could be authorised!

I am not an apologist for the banks but please don't have a campaign that results in your moneysavers losing money.

Honest shoppers subsidise shoplifters - will your next campaign be based around allowing shoplifters to steal with impunity - just charge the honest shopper an entrance fee if they want to come and browse in a store!

Twopints

So, to continue your crime theme, you believe it is OK for the banks to make £billions of unlawful charges? And then, when they are found out, it is those who reclaim their unlawfully taken charges that are somehow to blame?

You state earlier:

"failing to keep within agreed facilities should attract a charge that reflects the cost of managing the account and serving as a deterrant for those who breach rules and agreements".

The first part of that is of course lawful, but the second part is not. It's the law. So it's not Martin and anyone reclaiming or encouraging reclaiming that you should take issue with but the law itself(or the banks for breaking it). As long as the law is that banks cannot charge a penalty then they should abide by the law - they haven't and now they are seeing the result.

There are other lawful ways to deal with unauthorised transactions - rejecting them, returning cheques etc (yes, I know that can't be done with cheque card numbers) which the banks choose not to employ, relying instead on the unlawful method. Why do you think that banks don't have to obey the law, but you think that consumers have to obey banks T&C's?

It is precisely this type of imbalance between big business and individual consumers that people like Martin, and many of those that use his site, are fighting against.

Remember, "Screw the banks before they screw you!" (Yes,I have the car-sticker.)

:beer: :money: