Banking Industry

setmefree

if the Banks with their different schemes and savings accounts are out to make a profit for their investors and customers and of course themselves,and they say that they act on behalf of their customers and investors to protect their best interests, then why have they payed out nearly £1 billion of customers and investors money in goodwill gestures,especially when they say they have acted fairly and every action they do is transparent.
Why pay out in the first place, if as they say they have done nothing wrong, just goes to prove that no one is really secure are they.

setmefree

Lets look at the banking industry another way, so far all cases regarding the test case have been stayed on the advice of the FSA, now the latest High court judge has said he thinks that the stays should remain until a final decision is given,but he has no powers to make the local county courts do this.
Now bearing in mind that this Judge has given no indication whatsoever to the results, the Banks are still allowed to charge their customers, and the FSA has not stopped them.
So what will the final answer to all this be, will it be a case of the Banks win the argument and customers will have to continue paying these fee's,or will it be that the OFT win the case,which in turn would leave the customer with no confidence whatsoever in the FSA for allowing the banks to continue applying their charges whilst a case is in progress, also how much confidence would the consumer have in their local county courts for future cases.
I suppose it's a waiting game, but how many people are going to question the point of why have the FSA if they cant stay neutral when it comes to a case of such a high status.
Just my point of view.

itsallaboutyou

I think yes....but... I think the outcome of the charges test case will be an extremely important factor / moment - and could legislate what happens in the future. In my eyes, its all too clear that we will be asked to pay monthly fees for the privilege of having a bank account...

setmefree

Fedz wrote: »

Share prices fluctuate but, if you look at the wider market trend it's not as 'scarey' - the odd 'blip' is unnerving for shareholders but, I certainly don't stay awake on a night worrying about the fluctuations ...

I like your remark of odd Blip, the last time i saw graphs like the one's below was on Holby City.. and the blip was followed by a constant beep ..
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/overview/default.stm

I have the paddles ready, peddle that bike woman, we need more electric

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Mark7799

setmefree wrote: »

I like your remark of odd Blip, the last time i saw graphs like the one's below was on Holby City.. and the blip was followed by a constant beep ..
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/overview/default.stm

I have the paddles ready, peddle that bike woman, we need more electric

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Your are taking a very narrow with this selective quotation. Try looking at a graph that offers comparison over twelve or eighteen months rather than six to eight hours.

setmefree

Mark7799 wrote: »

Your are taking a very narrow with this selective quotation. Try looking at a graph that offers comparison over twelve or eighteen months rather than six to eight hours.

Ok there you go LMFAO

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/stockmarket/3/twelve_month.stm
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Mark7799

If you want to play silly b*ggers fine...

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EFTSE&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

As I (& Fedz) said, short term movement on the stock market is only a concern for people who will take very high risks or those who may not fully understand what they are talking about - longer term pictures have historically been of consistent growth.

setmefree

Mark7799 wrote: »

If you want to play silly b*ggers fine...

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EFTSE&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

As I (& Fedz) said, short term movement on the stock market is only a concern for people who will take very high risks or those who may not fully understand what they are talking about - longer term pictures have historically been of consistent growth.

That's a better one,if i join yours to mine we can make a rollercoaster, personally i know nothing about stocks and shares,never have,never will,and never want to.
I guess it's just a how did Fedz say ,oh yes gentle leg pulling.
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

On a serious note ,you say we have a steady growth,so on those terms we certainly ain't going to go into to a recession or are we ???

setmefree

Around £60 billion was wiped off the value of leading firms as the FTSE 100 Index plunged more than 4% amid fears of a US recession.
The Footsie dropped 250.1 points to 5647.8 by lunchtime, hitting its lowest levels for nearly 18 months.
At one point the index was down 329 points - or nearly 6% - more than the drop triggered by the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001.
The fall continues an unprecedented slide in London's top flight index this year amid a gloomy outlook for economies across the world. Other markets in Europe have also plunged more than 5% on the back of the poor sentiment.
Shares in London fell after Asian markets dropped up to 4% overnight, and following falls in New York for the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Investors across the Atlantic were left unimpressed by President George Bush's plans to stimulate the all-important US economy.
The Footsie is now down nearly 12% on the opening mark of 6456.9 this year -the worst start to a year since records began in 1936.

Tozer

So what? Stock markets go down and up. But I seem to recall that there has not been a 5 year period since WWII when the stock market has actually fallen. The only people it affects are those with short term interests and those approaching retirement.

I voted yes. I am confident in the UK banking system as I think it is one of the best in the World. You only have to look at the money which pours into the UK financial markets to see that there is international confidence in our systems.

As for the test case... well why would the judge lift the hold on cases until there is a decision? One of the key cornerstones of common law and the judicial precedent system is to ensure consistency. Given that there is a "test case" to "determine" the applicable law, it is MUCH more sensible to wait a relatively short period of time than permit District Judges in the County Courts to make inconsistent decisions.