£12 over limit fee for going 73p over for 2 days

powerful_Rogue

moneymoner said:

RogerBareford said:

You can certainly be convicted of speeding if your taken to court for going 1mph over the limit.

Yes there is a grace amount used by police and fixed cameras as they don't feel it's necessary to pull people over for such small amounts but there is nothing stopping people being convicted for it if they are stopped.

Good luck with that. So who is going to convict them and with what evidence if all speed detection devices have an allowed grace amount. A basic analog speedometer is not accurate enough with 1Mph units unless it is digital and calibrated on a regular basis.

Speed detection equipment is callibrated and therefore accurate. Vehicle speedos read under, never over. So if your car says you are doing 33mph, chances are you are doing 31mph - and as such could be prosecuted.

moneymoner

powerful_Rogue said:

Totally disagree. If the limit is £1000, then don't go close to it. As for a buffer, imagine they said 'Ok, there is a £1 buffer on all accounts' - Would you still be complaining if you went £1.03 over, so 3p over the buffer?

Totally disagree, because this post would not exist if there was a buffer of £1. Complaining about the fee for going over the £1 over limit buffer would be silly. Complaining about the £12 fee for going over the credit limit by 3p is not asking too much is it.

Even if the OP did keep the credit card balance say 10% below the limit, would not prevent an over limit fee being applied if the card was used at pay at pump petrol station where £99 is taken from the card even if only £10 of petrol is purchased.

moneymoner

powerful_Rogue said:

Speed detection equipment is callibrated and therefore accurate. Vehicle speedos read under, never over. So if your car says you are doing 33mph, chances are you are doing 31mph - and as such could be prosecuted.

So on what basis can you say they are accurate just because they are calibrated ? Anything can be calibrated, it does not mean the are accurate. You can calibrate your watch to the talking clock but it won't be nor never will be any close as accurate to an atomic clock.

Speed detection devices are calibrated much more than your speedometer but still not 100% accurate, they  have a tolerance of 2Mph. Would be a waste of time and money taking a driver to court for being 1Mph over the limit when the device being used to record the speed is not 100% accurate and also taking into account the drivers speedometer accuracy.

Sure, most peope would just accept the fine and move on without complaint. That does not make that person an irresponsible driver, they may well have been drving below the speed limit.

Go read the motoring laws concerning the tolerance for speed capture devices.

https://www.roadlawbarristers.co.uk/speeding-what-is-the-10-plus-2-rule-and-what-does-it-mean/

RogerBareford

moneymoner said:

RogerBareford said:

You can certainly be convicted of speeding if your taken to court for going 1mph over the limit.

Yes there is a grace amount used by police and fixed cameras as they don't feel it's necessary to pull people over for such small amounts but there is nothing stopping people being convicted for it if they are stopped.

Good luck with that. So who is going to convict them and with what evidence if all speed detection devices have an allowed grace amount. A basic analog speedometer is not accurate enough with 1Mph units unless it is digital and calibrated on a regular basis.

If you read the figures used in motoring law you will find that most speed capture devices have a 2Mph tolerance on roads and 3Mph tolerance on motorways. A fixed penalty is normally issued if above the tolerance.

It's a convictable driving offence to drive below the speed limit on some roads and motorways unless broken down or in a tractor.

So you agree that legally they can convict you for being 1 Mph over the speed limit if they can prove it but they don't as their equipment isn't accurate enough.

Well when it comes to credit cards they can very easily prove your 1p over your limit as each amount is exact and showing you are over your limit is a simple case of adding it up so there is no tolerance of error.

So considering this we don't need any allowance over the limit on a credit card as their is no innacuracy to account for.

moneymoner said:

RogerBareford said:

Why should there be a buffer when the customer knows the limit and can set their own buffer by making sure they are never within £X of the limit?

Sure, don't be irresponsible and keep a £0 balance. There should be a buffer to prevent small oversight's (not irresponsible spending) as in the subject of this post.

So what should the small buffer be?

If the buffer only needs to be small then why can't the person just make sure they are that amount under the limit at all times and keep their own buffer?

I could say I'm never going to go within £1000 of my limit as a buffer and then there will be no way i would go over.

If person A has a limit of £10,000 plus a buffer of £100 and person B just has a limit of £10,100 then they can both spend exactly the same amount without being charge an over-limit fee so why make it complicated by having two numbers instead of just having one limit?

Nebulous2

People tend to treat any buffer as the actual limit. A long time ago I would plan to run my current account as close as I could by the end of the month. My bank gave a free £100 overdraft as a buffer, and I treated -£100 as the limit, rather than £0. 

Its also partly regulation that got us to this point. Credit card companies used to charge more, but were more flexible about small amounts.  They were told that higher charges were inequitable and they weren't allowed to charge more than it cost them. The regulator held a finger in the air and decided £12 was a reasonable estimate of their costs. The credit card companies now treat it as a much harder limit, knowing the regulator has their back and wont accept complaints about £12.

moneymoner

RogerBareford said:

Well when it comes to credit cards they can very easily prove your 1p over your limit as each amount is exact and showing you are over your limit is a simple case of adding it up so there is no tolerance of error.

So considering this we don't need any allowance over the limit on a credit card as their is no innacuracy to account for.

If the credit card provider can detect such accurate amounts when it comes to billing then why not when it comes to purchases using the card. Why can't a purchase be rejected if it is 1p over the agreed limit set out within the T&C's.

The reason for a buffer is the fact that it is not possbile to know your exact balance at any time as many micro-payments, contact less payments and variable debits that do not always get taken on the exact date you would expect them. Who checks their balance every minute of the day and why would you waste your time doing so.

There are currently 3 numbers. The limit of the card, the amount the lender allows you to go over the limit and then the fee. Is that complicated any more than a simple buffer to you. ?

You would think with all the technology advances, it would be possible to have a digital credit card that displayed your balance on the actual card at the touch of a button or at the very least on the payment terminal it used on.

RogerBareford

moneymoner said:

RogerBareford said:

Well when it comes to credit cards they can very easily prove your 1p over your limit as each amount is exact and showing you are over your limit is a simple case of adding it up so there is no tolerance of error.

So considering this we don't need any allowance over the limit on a credit card as their is no innacuracy to account for.

If the credit card provider can detect such accurate amounts when it comes to billing then why not when it comes to purchases using the card. Why can't a purchase be rejected if it is 1p over the agreed limit set out within the T&C's.

The reason for a buffer is the fact that it is not possbile to know your exact balance at any time as many micro-payments, contact less payments and variable debits that do not always get taken on the exact date you would expect them. Who checks their balance every minute of the day and why would you waste your time doing so.

There are currently 3 numbers. The limit of the card, the amount the lender allows you to go over the limit and then the fee. Is that complicated any more than a simple buffer to you. ?

You would think with all the technology advances, it would be possible to have a digital credit card that displayed your balance on the actual card at the touch of a button

The card system doesn't work like that. If for any reason a payment needs to be made "offline" as in the card reader can't make a connection to the bank through the card processor then the payment can still be accepted without being able to check the balance. Some companies taking the payment can have a delay of several days before they send all their transactions for processing.

So actually it is possible for the customer to know the exact balance at any time if they want too but it's not possible for the bank to know this with how card payment systems currently work.

If someone doesn't want to keep track of every purchase like you said then they can just aim to keep below the limit by £X amount.

I really don't see the point in a buffer because like i said if a limit was £5,000 + £100 or just £5,100 with no buffer then what is the difference?

If why would someone being told it was £5000 + £100 make then less likely to be charged a fee than if they are told it's £5100?

It's just two different ways of saying the same thing so seems pointless having two numbers when one is just needed.

To you last point then yes much much more advanced systems are definetly possible but customers wouldn't like to pay the extras costs to create such a system

moneymoner

RogerBareford said:

To you last point then yes much much more advanced systems are definetly possible but customers wouldn't like to pay the extras costs to create such a system

Or reduced over limit fee's so no incentive to do so

If you can avoid a fee then that's a saving in my book, I'd happily pay for that. The OP is actually paying the extra costs now for the current system

Have you read a customer survey on that somewhere ?

powerful_Rogue

moneymoner said:

RogerBareford said:

To you last point then yes much much more advanced systems are definetly possible but customers wouldn't like to pay the extras costs to create such a system

Or reduced over limit fee's so no incentive to do so

If you can avoid a fee then that's a saving in my book, I'd happily pay for that. The OP is actually paying the extra costs now for the current system

Have you read a customer survey on that somewhere ?

Keep away from the top end of your limit and you won't get any over limit fees.

moneymoner

powerful_Rogue said:

Keep away from the top end of your limit and you won't get any over limit fees.

So how would that work in this case:

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2021/07/changes-to-pay-at-pump-up-to-p100-withheld-from-customers-accoun/

It isn't by ignorance that I go over my limit, it's when situations like tthe above cause you to. I've had direct debts declined when this type of transaction has failed to reverse the payment back. I very rarely take more than £10 of fuel and many supermarket stations don't even have a kiosk anymore.