Reclaim Unfair Bank Charges article discussion Part II

ARNIE_GOONER

well said Jasper! Am gutted, although not suprised the longer it went on the better it was for the banks and the more underhand it became, all strikes me as a bit of a "you scratch my back and so on" still im sure the fat cats will have a lovely xmas!! Wheres our guidance now then??? Too cocksure we were goin to win!

Pi**** O**!!!!!:mad:

mramra

jasper33 wrote: »

OMG how selfish are you !! there are lots of people out there who are in desperate situations through no fault of there own. The banks are the ones who caused this recession in the first place but they'll still pick up there massive bonuses this xmas while others struggle to put a turkey on the table. I don't know what you do for a living but perhaps your job is not affected by the current crisis were in I know lots of people who have lost their jobs and would have loved to have got there over the top charges back. If it weren't for these unfortunate people paying these charges myself included do you belive banking would be free to you. I think not you fool.

I don't know your personal circumstances of course, but the vast majority of bank charges are incurred by over-spending and poor budgeting or simple lack of financial awareness. Furthermore, bank charges are clearly laid out in the bank's terms and conditions which you accept by opening the account in the first place.

I am hopeful that this may be a wake up call to the common man and woman to pay attention to your finances!

newcook

mramra wrote: »

I am hopeful that this may be a wake up call to the common man and woman to pay attention to your finances!

On the recent occasions I have gone overdrawn it has been down to the bank giving the incorrect information or updating the info when they feel like it!
Say for example, the day before my payday I take out £10 on my way to work and on my breaktime I check my online account that states I still have £10 available funds so on my way home I take out that £10 – it then turns out that the bank hadn’t updated my online account until later that evening so earlier it was giving me the incorrect information and telling me I had available funds when in fact I had taken out my last £10 that morning. The bank then charges me £30! if their system was updated more regularly then this sort of mistake would not happen.

What peeves me even more is that with my bank its all automated – they don’t send me a letter stating ‘because you went overdrawn we will charge you £30’ – they send me an automated email at the end of the month!
In the example above I am being penalized for being overdrawn for less than 24 hours because their systems are slow in updating. How is that fair?!?

mramra

newcook wrote: »

Say for example, the day before my payday I take out £10 on my way to work and on my breaktime I check my online account that states I still have £10 available funds so on my way home I take out that £10 – it then turns out that the bank hadn’t updated my online account until later that evening so earlier it was giving me the incorrect information and telling me I had available funds when in fact I had taken out my last £10 that morning. The bank then charges me £30! if their system was updated more regularly then this sort of mistake would not happen.

This perfectly illustrates my point. Why didn't you know that you had already taken your last £10. Take some responsibility and pay more attention to your finances.

jasper33_2

mramra wrote: »

This perfectly illustrates my point. Why didn't you know that you had already taken your last £10. Take some responsibility and pay more attention to your finances.

This person may of needed this last £10 to feed there kids. You sit there all high and mighty when you obviously have nothing better to do than judge people. I bet you work for a bank and are due a big bonus.

mramra

jasper33 wrote: »

This person may of needed this last £10 to feed there kids. You sit there all high and mighty when you obviously have nothing better to do than judge people. I bet you work for a bank and are due a big bonus.

If that was the case, then they took £10 that they knew they didn't have thus incurring charges that were accepted upon opening the account. Where's the problem?

I don't work for a bank. I am not rich. I am careful with my family's money and ensure I never have to incur a charge due to negligence or mis-management of our finances.

newcook

mramra wrote: »

This perfectly illustrates my point. Why didn't you know that you had already taken your last £10. Take some responsibility and pay more attention to your finances.

the point I was making is that I was trying to be responsible by checking my account but as the bank hadnt updated I (obviously a foolish mistake on my behalf :rolleyes: ) assumed that I still had £10 left.

the bank also needs to take responsibility as people expect that in this day and age you can check your account and it is upto date - it is the banks responsibility to update their records so customers are always able to see what is left in their account

Morglin

As the banks had made it perfectly clear that, if they had to refund these charges, we would ALL be charged to use an ATM and for our day to day banking, I am really relieved at this verdict - a sensible one, at last.:T:beer:

If the OFT apeal to Europe (which hasn't been suggested), it will take 7 years to get a verdict.

The banks don't have to refund anything, although the OFT may discuss with them what level of future charges should apply - which seems a fair compromise all round.

It's unclear whether they will try and get back any money they hae paid out on the 'hardship grounds'.

Banks do charge a lot if you spend money they haven't given permission for - but as with sub-prime lenders, the T&C's are perfectly clear - either accept them or don't spend money you haven't got.

Lin

thebillet

I can't believe some folks would be so harsh with others. I doubt many people would argue against paying a fee for going over an agreed limit, I might be wrong. I think the issue is about fairness and proportionality. I think any sanction which is far in excess of the original "misdemeanour" and which can lead to a compounding effect i.e. punished again each month is disproportionate and unfair. The banks themselves tacitly agree that charges as applied in the past were unfair, that is why they are changing them, but the victims of overcharging get no redress. As for the assertion that it is individuals own fault I wouldn't presume to know all others' circumstances that allow or hinder people managing their finances. My guess is that a few people in Cumbria will have all sorts of problems managing a lot of things in the near future would we want them to suffer further through excessive charges because due to other things being on their mind they didn't check their balances?

jasper33_2

Morglin wrote: »

As the banks had made it perfectly clear that, if they had to refund these charges, we would ALL be charged to use an ATM and for our day to day banking, I am really relieved at this verdict - a sensible one, at last.:T:beer:

If the OFT apeal to Europe (which hasn't been suggested), it will take 7 years to get a verdict.

The banks don't have to refund anything, although the OFT may discuss with them what level of future charges should apply - which seems a fair compromise all round.

It's unclear whether they will try and get back any money they hae paid out on the 'hardship grounds'.

Banks do charge a lot if you spend money they haven't given permission for - but as with sub-prime lenders, the T&C's are perfectly clear - either accept them or don't spend money you haven't got.

Lin

You just as bad as Mramara. Some people are in such a bad need of money thru no fault of there own. They are robbed by greedy bankers. Do you think if these unfortunate people who pay these charges were all as perfect as you that banking would be free. I think not you fool.