Why a bank charges win doesn’t mean the end of ‘free banking’ blog discussion

Phoenixx73

Personaly. being one of the people my bank likes (i.e. they can milk me for charges) I wouldnt mind paying a monthly charge (assuming it wasnt in the £100's) as it would probably work out cheaper over the course of a year than the current charges system. I'm all for equality in everything, and amazingly so are others, as long as it dosn't adversely affect them.

nickmack

exil wrote: »

The fact that an individual transaction costs virtually nothing is neither here nor there. It still costs money to provide the computers, networks, support staff, backup, admin, etc. These have to be paid for.

These have all been factored into the figures I've seen by bank insiders. Even being generous with the figures, they still can't make it add up to more than a few pounds.

The OFT case revolves round HOW the bank's service is to be paid for. Today, it's paid for by big charges on a minority of customers. If the banks can't do that, they'll charge a smaller amount to everybody.

Maybe the banks are already thinking, how can we recoup the money if we can't make penalty charges? It's possible they will make charges for other (legitimate) services under certain circumstances, but at least it will be fairer.

This is not what the case is about though. The first part is to determine whether the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations applies to bank charges. If this is shown, the next part is decide if they are actually unfair.

exil

Fair enough, but this thread is not about the rights and wrongs of the case,
it;s about what will be the practical effect on customers if the banks lose.

I suspect I'll end up paying maybe £20 a month for an account averaging £1,000 in credit.

Paul_Herring

exil wrote: »

I suspect I'll end up paying maybe £20 a month for an account averaging £1,000 in credit.

If my current(!) main current account does that I'll be moving my DD's etc to one of my other current accounts that don't and closing it.

a11waysindebt

I think they will all do it,A small charge for putting money in and out and a monthly charge on the account.This is where the arguments will start with was it worth all the hassle in the beginning with the reclaims.

Dylanwing

I suspect I'll end up paying maybe £20 a month for an account averaging £1,000 in credit.

Well, other people have covered the cost of your account for the last 25 years, so you have little to complain about.

UK007BullDog

In some countries like Germany most Banks charge a fee for every transaction and the account also has a monthly fee.

I think this will be the new way forward for the banks if their income stream is closed down.

Charges are better served on a percentage basis than one blanket fee. So if overdrawn by 1 Pence then the charge should be 0.01% not the £28 or £38 they usually charge. That would be fairer!?!

I am currently working for a bank but soon I will be gone. Its rough and weak customers are bullied into taking on more debt.

UK007BullDog

On some threads posters state that they would move to a bank which does not charge, but what if all banks start to charge? Then there is no place to switch to.

jamesd

Banks already make money from always in credit current accounts via merchant fees for taking debit and credit cards, just like credit card companies. If you want to cost your bank money, switch to using cash - expensive to handle and no merchant fees - and direct debits.

Paul_Herring

UK007BullDog wrote: »

On some threads posters state that they would move to a bank which does not charge, but what if all banks start to charge? Then there is no place to switch to.

Then I shall be arranging my finances in such a way that I don't get charged as much as I normally would.

For example, I currently withdraw money once or twice a week, if a charge was levied each time I'd withdraw only once a month/every 2 months.