Hsbc...

azlana

I currenlty bank with hsbc and have done so for the last 10 years or more with out any problems. My current issue is that for the month of may i have incurred a charge of £150 over draft charges on my account despite the money being in the bank yes in other accounts but all with hsbc. I transfered money back into the account when i noticed that i was over drawn (check acc about every 2 weeks online) to put myself back into my over draft limit. I have never ever been over drawn before in the last 10 months. My question is is this fair can i complain and what advice has any one got.

just to be clear i have a personal acc, joint acc and savings acc all with HSBC at the time other acc had the money in to put my current account back in to black but at no point was i told that i was incurring a charge until it came out.

Hominu

1. HSBC don't care about your other banks, only the account in question. Go overdrawn and you'll be charged as stated in the terms and conditions that you agreed to when you opened the account. You would have been given a copy of these charges.

2. If you have not had any charges refunded in the past 12 months ring up and apologise - say it was a complete oversight on your part and that you corrected the problem as soon as you noticed the overdraft was being used. If you stumble across someone nice, they might just refund the charges for you (or a percentage).

Escorcio

Go into the branch and talk to someone, outlining the fact that you are a long standing customer and this has never happened before. It is likely that they will refund some as gesture of goodwill.
Keep an eye on your balance or register yourself for text alerts in the future.

Caladan

If you talk to the right person in branch you may get the whole lot back.

Hope it helps,
Cal

Escorcio

Caladan wrote: »

If you talk to the right person in branch (not on the phone, people on the phone have a limit of £50 for refunds generally speaking

Simply not true

noh

Caladan wrote: »

.... but many staff are flexible, and if not ask to speak to a Manager, they almost always cave if it's a first offence).

Hope it helps,
Cal

If the OPs charges were £150 it was not a "first offence" as that would be a max charge of £25.
It was a second third and fourth and probably more "offence"
http://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/2/overdrafts/overdrafts-charges

Gromitt

noh wrote: »

If the OPs charges were £150 it was not a "first offence" as that would be a max charge of £25.

A 21-day run with 12 payments will charge you £150. Since a lot of people only check their account once a month, that's quite easily to rack up and would be considered (to them) a first offence.

Caladan

noh wrote: »

If the OPs charges were £150 it was not a "first offence" as that would be a max charge of £25.
It was a second third and fourth and probably more "offence"
http://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/2/overdrafts/overdrafts-charges

Aye, but I look at from in a 'charging cycle' rather than each incident that leads to an overdraft if that makes sense. By first offence I mean no previous refunds and has not had to complain about fees in the past.

matttye

I wonder why banks can only use the 'right to set off' when it benefits them and not the consumer.

Gromitt

matttye wrote: »

I wonder why banks can only use the 'right to set off' when it benefits them and not the consumer.

If you don't agree to it, keep your money in separate banking groups. For example, Santander and Lloyds TSB.

Typically savings accounts used to offer a more competitive rate than a current account, but now its the other way around. I guess they didn't want you earning 7% and just asking them to transfer to your current account when bills/etc are due. You'd have to do that yourself.

Caladan

matttye wrote: »

I wonder why banks can only use the 'right to set off' when it benefits them and not the consumer.

I find your posts are well thought out and informative and thank you for them, I will argue this point though.

The right of set-off is the right to balance an overdue debt against a credit balance. As the bank has agreed to provide the overdraft facility (albeit informally) the debt is not overdue. The customer has requested the overdraft by authorising payments out of the account without sufficient funds in the account to settle them. This is a point of contention, and I'm in mixed minds as to whether or not it's right, but on balance I believe it is.

Also - The customer may have the funds in the other accounts for a specific purpose, such as a cheque issued or an electronic payment waiting to be sent. As the bank is not concerned about the credit worthiness of the customer at this stage (hence allowing the informal overdraft) it could be considered unreasonable for it to start setting off the debt.

Hope this post makes sense, it's Friday after all.

Kind regards,
Cal