Bank Charges case upheld

oldwiring

You get your charges back.

What will you do to prevent yourselves having occasion to be charged in future? If OFT does eventually decide an appropriate level of charges, will you accept them?

Moglex

stoneman wrote: »

Look who's a clever guy then. Stealing money that doesn't belong to you

Let's just stop right there.

No one is stealing anything.

The definition of theft is taking something with the intent to permenantly deprive the rightful owner.

Apart from the fact that in the vast majority of these cases the penalties were not for taking anything, the were for the bank not allowing the customer to take something, there was no such intent so nothing was stolen.

So please stop making a fool of youself by talking complete nonsense.

azjh77

I have a new account, a budget that reflects my income, and once these last few debts are paid, I will never go into debt again. I will never borrow and live within my means.

Is that Ok?

Liani

Oh no help !!!
My bank Lloyds TSB has filed a defence on my claim on the 14th day!!!!
What shall I do? I received £750 from them but have turned it down to go all the way for my £2,225 - am I doing the right thing as I have just been reading about their win this week?????
Thanks

Moglex

stoneman wrote: »

And where do the people who are asking for the refunds get off asking for ALL the money they have been charged.

Well, they are asking for the illegal penalties to be returned.

I'm sure if the bank are prepared to demonstrate exactly how much extra, for example, not paying a direct debit costs them they are perfectly at liberty to make such a charge.

I would estimate the cost, in the absence of a letter, to be a small fraction of a penny, and I'm sure most people would be quite happy to pay that.

What you cannot seem to understand is that the banks have been illegally helping themselves to people's money, and now the people are asking for it back.

stoneman

Moglex wrote: »

Let's just stop right there.

No one is stealing anything.

The definition of theft is taking something with the intent to permenantly deprive the rightful owner.

Apart from the fact that in the vast majority of these cases the penalties were not for taking anything, the were for the bank not allowing the customer to take something, there was no such intent so nothing was stolen.

So please stop making a fool of youself by talking complete nonsense.

So writing out a cheque for money that you don't have, or have an agreement to access is not stealing?
and your answer to the last part of my post is.......

Moglex

stoneman wrote: »

The reason I think the banks have not decided to fight any of these is as stated before, yes they are wrong to call them "charges", because it is not lawful to make a profit from an administration fee,

Yes, they were acting illegaly.

but I am sure if they went to court and tried to get some of the money the claimant asks for reduced, by at least saying " OK, we overcharged them, but surely they are not entitled to ask for all the money returned" they would be able to reduce what they are paying out by at least a third.

So you actually agree that 2/3 or what they took was theft from the customer, and yet still you come on a reclaim fee thread and whine and moan about the poor banks. :rolleyes:

And another thing, don't you think that by claiming back your "unfair fees " from those nasty banks that that will be the end of the matter. Wait till the next time you try to get a loan or a mortgage.

Once again you are talking complete piffle. Reclaimed fees do not affect your credit rating.

Do read some of the information freely available before you come on here spouting nonsense in your pro-bank ranting.

Moglex

If the OFT actually gets the information from the banks as to how much it cost for their computer to not perfom a DD as opposed to perfoming one, or to allow debit card transaction when someone is alread at/past their o/d limit and sets a fair charge, it will probably be just a few pence.

Even if it's rounded up to a pound, I'm sure people will be happy to pay.

What has got everyone's hackles up is that the banks are illegally charging people fees that bear absolutely no relationship whatsoever to the 'service' provided.

Effectively thay have stolen the customer's money, and, just as with any other case of theft, the agrieved party want their property back.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand.


BTW, this thread does not belong here as it is not about reclaiming charges.

tenaciousD_2

I'll accept them if I think they are appropriate, which I'd class as £4 at the most.

stoneman

Moglex wrote: »

Yes, they were acting illegaly.

So you actually agree that 2/3 or what they took was theft from the customer, and yet still you come on a reclaim fee thread and whine and moan about the poor banks. :rolleyes:


Once again you are talking complete piffle. Reclaimed fees do not affect your credit rating.

Do read some of the information freely available before you come on here spouting nonsense in your pro-bank ranting.

This is fun:rotfl:
See, you insulted me personally, while I just insulted people in general.
Now, I really want to know at what point during the period you accumulated over £2,400 worth of bank fees, you decided to stop your direct debits, standing orders, etc until you had sorted things out, or were you still at Uni and had no notion of the word responsability.
BTW, you really think that there is no sharing of info between banks, who of course supply the loans, etc. Just because it doesn't go on a formal credit report, doesn't mean it ain't there.
I'm bored now, I will let you have the last word.:T