Bank Charges case upheld

davidgmmafan

"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."

Can you not imagine a person in circumstances different to your own? I say this because it is likely that many many people have had a stain put on thier credit record becuase of these unlawful charges - do you consider this fair, right and just?

Very few people are objecting to the principle of charges, we take issue with the level they are set at. What EXACTLY does a bank do when a direct debit is 'reutrned'? Nothing physical happens, two computers communicate, and the bank charges up to £38 for NOT doing a transaction. Does this sound resonable? Where is the theft mentioned?

My brother had an £1,100 agreed O/D limit when he was made redundant. He contacted the bank as they advise in thier nice freindly sounding leaflets. They told him they could not deal with him until his mortgae was three months in arrears.

They also continued to pile on charges and recently they passed the file onto a debt collection agency. The total claim was £4,000 which is made up almost entirely of (unlawful) charges. Banks have privilaged access to these kind of records and therefore the fact they would make charges (and default people for such charges) that are not permitted by law is not right. How can they bounce a direct debit but not the charges?

You may find it eye opening to take a little time to find out how debt colletions agencies act. Having heard them on the phone breaking the rules they are supposed to follow and being downright rude I hold such people in very low regard. In fact once I had done some research I discovered the company sending the threatening letters had no authority to recover the debt.

Sorry to get carried away but the whole point of a forum like this is understanding. I find, on the whole, people who are in favour of the current system tend to be less informed than those that are actually claiming thier charges back BUT that said I think perhaps some discretion should be given to the banks. Given the inherent problems in determining EXACTLY how much it costs to perform certain tasks (ie they don't occur in a vacuum) some sensible figure should be arrived at.

And for the record I do agree with things like late payment fees and think the law should be rewritten here (again with some kind of cap).

I am sick of hearing the line manage your money better - there are people out there who do not have £30 to spare!!! In Ireland one bank charges £3 because they're prohibited by law for charging more than thier costs - are they losing £36 per time?????

Rant over good day.

davidgmmafan

If a bank paid out a case that I had taken I would continue to operate the account as normal.

In general I don't incur charges and most of my current claim is for interest - they have had this money which they should not of had so I think 8% is fair.

The statements banks make about applying any further charges in future in accordance with the terms and conditions is pretty meaningless. My response is fine do that, just establish that they are lawful first.

Moglex

oldwiring wrote: »

If you think I do not understand the points abou charginb, then you are absolutely wrong

My apologies.

I was simply making an observation based on your apparant utter cluelessness on the subject.

As to where the thread should be, Iwill rely on the moderators' decision not yours. You own as much of MSE as I do: that is nothing. We both are only members

OOOooh, touch-eeee

I was merely offering an opinion.

I believe that is allowed, no?

manhater

You should be a politician david

Al_Mac

Moglex wrote: »

And, yes, of course I included account staff, (although not 24/7 - why would I do that?)

Because you claimed

Moglex wrote: »

And I do have a great deal of knowledge about the technicalities of the data processing systems required and the cost of providing thse data processing systems.

I'd be surprised if any financial institution didn't have 1 or 2 staff available all the time to support the systems that bring in the money, 24/7.

Russjo

I have to say that I have spent the last two evenings reading the CAG website and not once, have I seen one person passing judgement on another. We're supposed to be helping each other and yet over the past week I have read numerous posts from certain people that insist on reading the riot act to people who have found themselves in trouble for one reason or another. I married a debt of £28,000 and instead of wagging my finger at my husband, I have tried to educate him and support him. I am truly fed up with the comments that have been made on this site over the past week and I strongly believe that something should be done about it!!

Stephen_Leak

oldwiring wrote: »

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?

Good questions, and ones that need to be asked.

My charges were due to date miscalculations and inertia. Therefore, I have arranged Direct Debits for my MSP and ASDA cards. I no longer use and will close my MINT account, but this is for purely financial reasons, not due to my claim against them. All CCC's charge the £12, which is still unlawful.

However, if the law allowed CCC's to charge, for example, £2 to cover costs plus £10 as a disincentive to late payments, then what argument could I have with this?

Russjo

Mark7799 wrote: »

I have posted this question in various forms previously and can't yet recall an answer.

Hi Mark,
I'm happy to give you an answer. I have already taken steps personally to ensure that I avoid paying charges and I'm pleased to say that in the past 7 months, I've done exactly that. I'm more than happy to pay a charge in proportion to what it actually costs to administer the error on my part. Part of the reason I am avidly following up my personal claim is that the bank, despite trying to reason with them, decided to apply excessive charges to my account at a point in our lives when we couldn't keep up and this led to a snowball effect. I don't think it is reasonable to deny us an extended temporary overdraft to help us out and then charge us £250 in one week in charges. I am a firm believer in trying to educate people financially rather than continuously penalising them and ignoring them. Hope this answers your question, could quite happily type all day about this

Twinkly

*sigh*

A few points to add to this discussion:

1) The banks unlawfully took my money from my bank account
2) I can lawfully reclaim that money back from their total accumulated profits
3) I will not be paid directly out of anyone elses personal bank account
4) You personally did not take my money, I am not taking yours - the bank is responsible for its own business practices past, present and future - not you or I
5) I am reclaiming unlawful charges taken from my account
6) Get over it

It really is that simple

stoneman

Moglex wrote: »

Indeed. I just insulted one person who deserved it. You, on the other hand insulted 'people in general', i.e. everyone, and you seem to think that's a good thing.

Why don't you read and understand what is writen here.

I never accumulated any such bank charges.

Are you making this up or can you not read English?

Ever heard of the data protection act?

If they did that without the proper authority they could get into very serious trouble.

Says he before making another post

Sorry mate, I have just come in from a lovely night out with my wife, and I see you're still ranting, go back to your origional post to me and tell me where it says you have not claimed back over £2,400 from the banks. Christ, you must have been on one hell of a bender.
Just a question, is it your time of the month or something:rotfl:
Anyway, have a good night, and it's been a pleasure to spar with you, no offence intended.