Bank Charges Test Case Article discussion

gary_lawrence

I was living in England up until Nov 05 and have NatWest and Abbey bank accounts that have had charges on them.

I now live in Scotland but still use these English banks. Am I able to claim back 5 or 6 years? Does it depend on the bank's registered office/head office or does it depend on where you live? What if during the last 5/6 years you have lived in both England and Scotland?

Thanks

mackinj

Hi, I am astounded that A&L have just responded to me saying I do not meet their criteria for financial hardship. In the last 12 months I have had an attempt on my life by my ex partner, who was jailed as a result. All this has ultimately left me with unaffordable debts of around £30.5k, plus divorce costs upwards of £4.5k. I have been unable to work since the attack, through injuries and depression and have been in receipt of incapacity benefits. I have also just lost my job as a result. I think their reasoning is because I have managed, until now to remain up to date with my mortgage and council tax. My debts are being handled by the charity CAP (Christians Against Poverty) who believe I may ultimately have to go bankrupt, so I will lose my home! Instead of being applauded for getting 12 months down the line without being in arrears with priority debts, A&L are penalising me. What more dire straits do I have to be in to be considered in financial hardship? Can you tell me what I should do next please? PLEASE HELP!!

Chilternmumsto4

I have already claimed and received a payment, Will I be able to claim for any charges that I have incurred since that initial payout?

Thanks
Barbara:rolleyes:

kwmlondon

I'm slightly split on this issue and I think a lot of people are as users of this website seem to flock towards one camp or the other; the financially canny who are taking care, and those who find themselves in trouble and are trying to sort themselves out.

All the people who have paid really serious amounts in bank charges through mismanaging their accounts (is anyone going to say that those who persistently exceed their overdraft limits had no control over their actions?) are going to have an obvious interest in this discussion.

For those who have not been charged by their bank this debate is going to be rather frustrating as this discussion unfolds. In the UK we have relatively low charges for bank use. We don't pay to deposit cheques, withdraw cash, pay by direct debit or set up standing orders. However, these kinds of bank accounts are becoming more difficult to obtain if you pay in less than a certain monthly sum. Online banks are certainly implementing this. My conclusion is that if banks are prevented from extracting a source of revenue from people they will either find another source of funding or rid themselves of the unprofitable customers. I'm reluctant to get personal (I'll come to my circumstances, if anyone gives a hoot) and I'm really interested in what people think banks will do to: a) replace the income that used to come from fining customers b) find the money to pay everyone's claims (this is NOT a good time for the banks to have to find millions of pounds from nowhere) c) get rid of unprofitable customers.

Smasher

Banks will still be extremely profitable without these extortionate charges. These charges are pure greed.
They can fix it very easily by simply refusing to honour payments where there are lack of funds.
Granted there are those who are blatantly irresponsible who perhaps deserve less sympathy, but that doesn't mean that the bank should have a right to use it as a means to profit. When a customer is irresponsible, the customer pays a disproportionate price, when a bank is irresponsible, the taxpayer pays a disproportionate price..

fedupwiththeworry

All the people who have paid really serious amounts in bank charges through mismanaging their accounts (is anyone going to say that those who persistently exceed their overdraft limits had no control over their actions?) are going to have an obvious interest in this discussion.

That statement is a very broad brush to paint everyone with. In my case I have often been charged ridiculous amounts of charges when I haven't had sufficient money in my account. Trouble is I'm treading a very fine line and don't know what I'm going to have available from week to week. I've never had enough money spare to build up a buffer for the bad times, so when I do have a bad week there isn't enough money available to pay everyone.

When these charges are added obviously I'm £35.00 per non payment worse off still, where am I suppose to find that money from ??

As for miss-management, if I could go into my account online at the beginning of the week and find an easy way to suspend payments of DD/SO's I would do it. I could then contact the companies involved but avoid bank charges compounding the problem. Unfortunately SO's can only be moved, assuming you have 2 clear days and DD's have to be cancelled then you have to re set them all up again. Not exactly making management of your account easy are they ?

ricks3

Since my claim was put on hold I have incurred more bank charges... do I need to start a new claim for these or can I add them into my existing claim when the hold is lifted?

krisskross

fedupwiththeworry wrote: »

That statement is a very broad brush to paint everyone with. In my case I have often been charged ridiculous amounts of charges when I haven't had sufficient money in my account. Trouble is I'm treading a very fine line and don't know what I'm going to have available from week to week. I've never had enough money spare to build up a buffer for the bad times, so when I do have a bad week there isn't enough money available to pay everyone.

?

In your situation I would cancel all DDs and standing orders. Draw cash out of the bank and pay bills manually over the counter.

Although there are certain to be changes in the way and amounts that is charged for not having sufficient money to meet DDs there will still be charges. Enough to put someone like yourself with no buffer zone into serious problems.I know that in some instances it costs a bit more to not pay bills by DD but 1 single bank charge can wipe out any savings made.

Nathan_Spleen

Smasher wrote: »

Banks will still be extremely profitable without these extortionate charges. These charges are pure greed.
They can fix it very easily by simply refusing to honour payments where there are lack of funds.
Granted there are those who are blatantly irresponsible who perhaps deserve less sympathy, but that doesn't mean that the bank should have a right to use it as a means to profit. When a customer is irresponsible, the customer pays a disproportionate price, when a bank is irresponsible, the taxpayer pays a disproportionate price..

To put that into perspective, take look at the penalty meter from Which?

http://www.which.co.uk/reports_and_campaigns/money/campaigns/Banking%20and%20credit/Bank%20charges/bank_charges_campaign_559_74996.jsp

Scroll down and press 'start counter'.

Smasher

Thats quite a perspective.. Are those commas in the right place? :P