We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
2000% charged by Lloyds for £1.53 for one day.
Comments
-
To be honest I'm amazed they refunded call costs at all.a bit harsh on the chap, in my opinion
if i had been a Lloyds customer for that long i would certainly have tried to get them to waive the charges, even if they are the T&Cs. and £1.00 to cover a 25minute call is low....£10.00 is fairly standard ime
The bank acted in the way they always said they would act if the customer didn't operate the account properly.
The bank isn't in the wrong.0 -
£1.53 is trivial. It is inconsequential. It's an excuse for a charge, not a reason.
Just because they can, doesn't mean they have to. How about the banks living in the real world? If they want to operate in the mass marketplace, they need to understand that ordinary people have enough on their plates. To no person with any normal sense of proportion is it going to seem at all important whether a bank gets £1.53 on time. It's not like they need it.
If somebody owes me money, and they're going to pay me on Wednesday, but they're a couple of quid short on Wednesday and make it up on Thursday, do I make a song and dance about it? Would I get much sympathy if I did? Why is everybody so keen to defend the banks?"It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Because this is MSE and we're stoozing the interest-free period.What I can't understand is why so many people insist on paying on the last day
Or perhaps we're just not all the sort of tight-!!!!!! who like to pay their bills straight away "so I know it's done".
Or perhaps we've got a life."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
If somebody owes me money, and they're going to pay me on Wednesday, but they're a couple of quid short on Wednesday and make it up on Thursday, do I make a song and dance about it?
Bad analogy, the banks are not saying "Pay us on Wednesday, or we'll charge you Thursday", they are saying "Pay us any time in the next 20 days, making the absolute last day this date:".
If the banks said "Pay us within 365 days", people would still pay on day 366 and still complain.Because this is MSE and we're stoozing the interest-free period.
Because 20 days of 3% interest on £1000 is £1.64 and if you forget to pay it in time you get charged £12.
You have 20 freaken days, no need to pay it on the day you get the bill.Or perhaps we're just not all the sort of tight-!!!!!! who like to pay their bills straight away "so I know it's done".Or perhaps we've got a life.
People with a life don't pay bills on the very last day its due to save a few quid. They pay when they have time. If that means they lose a possible 64p in interest (minus tax), so be it.
People without a life can wait until the very last day its due because they have nothing any better to do, then they'll come on here and complain when the bank charges them for being late with the payment.0 -
£1.53 is trivial. It is inconsequential. It's an excuse for a charge, not a reason.
To no person with any normal sense of proportion is it going to seem at all important whether a bank gets £1.53 on time. It's not like they need it.
I'm sure £1.53 is a fairly trivial amount to Tesco's, does this mean they should accept £5 when your bill come to £6.53? After all, it's not like they need it.0 -
dresdendave wrote: »I'm sure £1.53 is a fairly trivial amount to Tesco's, does this mean they should accept £5 when your bill come to £6.53? After all, it's not like they need it.
I'll try that at Tesco's tomorrow, walk in, take a £1 loaf, walk to the checkout and say "This loaf is £1. It's a trivial amount, I'll pay you in a few days. It's not like you need the cash." and see what they say. I'm pretty sure they'll be demanding I pay before walking out of the store.
It's not like the bank saying they want paying by Wednesday and you paying on Thursday. You used the card, you knew you had to pay it back, the bank were even kind enough to send you a letter saying you had 20 days left to pay before they'll apply charges. You can't say much fairer than that.0 -
While I agree with the majority on this thread, that the bank have charged as per their T&C's....£24 for £1.53 could possibly be challenged, as it could be deemed to be an excessive charge for such as small amount.
I thought charges were meant to be reasonable?
Whether someone would be bothered to go through the complaints procedures etc. to challenge this is another matter, I certainly wouldn't be bothered.0 -
While I agree with the majority on this thread, that the bank have charged as per their T&C's....£24 for £1.53 could possibly be challenged, as it could be deemed to be an excessive charge for such as small amount.
I thought charges were meant to be reasonable?
Whether someone would be bothered to go through the complaints procedures etc. to challenge this is another matter, I certainly wouldn't be bothered.
A £12 charge (per event) has been ruled as reasonable - though not tested in court AFAIK0 -
a bit harsh on the chap, in my opinion ...
Just guessing, I think 'he' may be a 'she'.jonesMUFCforever wrote: »If you read his original post ... I think he was very fortunate ...
Huh? That seems to be a gratuitous insult to the majority of cardholders who somehow or other manage to conduct their affairs without the OP's apparent problem.... perhaps we're just not all the sort of tight-!!!!!! who like to pay their bills straight away "so I know it's done".
Or perhaps we've got a life.0 -
While I agree with the majority on this thread, that the bank have charged as per their T&C's....£24 for £1.53 could possibly be challenged, as it could be deemed to be an excessive charge for such as small amount.
.
I think too many people are focussing on the amount of money involved rather than looking at the bigger picture. The OP had a statement telling him/her when the payment was due and what the minimum payment was. It also would have shown the fees charged for non-compliance. The OP failed to pay on time and also failed to pay the correct amount and the bank correctly applied charges. The charges are not related to the amount of money involved so the 2000% mentioned in the post title is complete fiction.
What irked me and possibly others was the OP telling the story as if it was the nasty bank ripping him/her off rather than accepting their own failure to manage their card correctly. Banks are by no means perfect but in this scenario I cannot see that they have done anything wrong. An aplogetic phone call to Lloyds requesting refund of charges as a goodwill gesture to a longstanding customer would have been more appropriate, certainly no grounds for demanding refunds, official complaints etc.
The best thing the OP can do is vote with their feet, close the card and sign up for a new credit card, one which does not charge fees for late payment, failing to pay the minimum or going over limit.
Good luck with that.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards