the bank charges case

I cant see this being a good thing with the way things are at the moment with the credit crunch

"Looking at my statements from the time, they were taking up to £180 a month off me in charges, it then left me short for paying my bills."

Just how far past your agreed over draft must you have to go to incur these sorts of charges? Bloody ridiculous.

quote:Originally posted by CountDuckula
"Looking at my statements from the time, they were taking up to £180 a month off me in charges, it then left me short for paying my bills."

Just how far past your agreed over draft must you have to go to incur these sorts of charges? Bloody ridiculous.

id="quote">
Think thats a bit harsh tbf - you have no idea of other peoples circs. I personally feel the banks were taking the piss with some of their charges.

Yes the charges are high but only when you go over your agreed overdraft.

With so many people claiming back charges, it has a negative impact on those who don't tend to go over their agreed overdraft with banks now introducing account fees. They will have to recoup that loss somewhere else and it is the majority of people who don't go over the limit that are also having to pay up for it.

I've been over my agreed overdraft a few times in the past 6 years, I've paid less than £150 out in charges, my fault! But some people have managed to recoup thousands of pounds in charges ? How often did they have to go over their agreed overdraft to get to such an amount?!?

It does seem a lot, but as Eric says you don't know the circumstances.
My brother is still a student and he was charged £35 on several occasions for going £3 or £4 over his limit. For him, that was a lot of money and he wanted to claim but then they put a freeze on the claims until the case is resolved. He could get something like £500 back from all the charges. and no he wasn't spending it all on beer!!

What about the millions of people who dont have an agreed overdraft? All it takes is one missed DD - that in itself can generate a hell of a lot of charges.

The issue is not that there should be no charges, but that the charges as they stand are excessive.
I'm not really feeling any sympathy for the banks at the minute. If the charges had been fair to start with then this case would never have been heard.

I agree with your Eric, but whether they were wrong in the first place, i think is going to still be an issue for us. As they have said, theyhave to find the money from somewhere, so will charge us for other things.

The consumer wont be the winner in all this

One thing that grates on me and probably causes a lot of the missed DDs etc is how long it still takes to transfer money bewteen banks and for cheques to clear [V] Any time I've had a problem though I ring my bank and they've reimbursed my charges [:I]

But didn't HSBC recently announce billions of profits again in their last report?

quote:Originally posted by jonicko
but didn't HSBC recently announce billions of profits again in their last report?

id="quote">

yes, and they like to keep getting record profits. So they will do anything they can to keep their profits as high as possible

OK, admittedly I don't know the circumstances behind that particular case and I accept that a £30 charge for going a couple of pounds over an agreed limit is excessive.
However, without exception all the people I know IRL who have tried to claim back bank charges are the ones who have no concept of money management. They will consistently go way beyond their agreed overdrafts, write cheques that bounce, have their cards taken off them, accounts suspended, live beyond their means etc.

As NeoShoegal says, why do those of us who manage our accounts well have to subsidise those who don't?

I would much rather pay for my banking than be charged £40 for going a few quid over my overdraft.
I pay for my business banking, I get a statement of charges and I'm able to reconcile each transaction with the charges. Its a service and I dont mind paying for it.

I also have a personal account which is 'free' - I cant reconcile the charges on that account with the so-called admin involved in emailing me to tell me a DD wasn't paid.

Unfortunately I'm one of those who is hoping to claim back in excess of £1k. This is going on from a few years back, and I wasn't very good at money management.

I have, however, stayed in the back/within my overdraft for ages now, and I totally accept that I should be charged for going over my overdraft, but I think £30 is excessive. I've not had these charges broken down either, so really not sure how the banks can justify these.

I've also had the help of Hitched to reduce my outgoings, bills, insurance, shopping etc (recommendations of moneyexpert, and other such sites), so a big thank you to you all ?

'If' I get these charges back, it will really come in handy for when I got on mat leave, as I'm only entitled to MA, and hopefully will allow me to stay off for a month longer. but if I dont, we're well covered for it anyway, and I certainly wont be going over my overdraft to cover, I'll just have to go back to work early, and I've already come to terms with that.

Sadly, these charges to creat a snowball effect, even if you only go over your overdraft by a few pounds.

Nat
x

My H claimed and got his money back from a few years ago when he had just left school and hadn't much of a grasp on his finances. Now I have him on a tight leesh he is much better able to deal with his finances and have paid for an account with supposedly better features but it turned out crap and now we have just standard accounts. I find my bank quite good to deal with and wouldn't mind paying a fee for them though I'd to close a few accounts as I seem to have tons of the bloody things ?

I also had bad money management quite a few years ago, well from 15-18 and successfully claimed my charges back early last year I think it was.

The thing I hate is and this is an example of something that happened the other day, a DD came out, put me a little bit in the red and by a little bit, I literally mean 2/3 quid, later on that day I noticed online that I had got a 30 quid charge for it. I rang the bank and explained I had X amount coming into my bank the following day and could they maybe lift the charge and they said no. 30 frigging quid though for being 2/3 quid over, it's stupid.

It doesn't really matter how people have gone overdrawn or why, the fact is that the charges are unlawful and people should never have charged that much in the first place. I would be happy to see a charge for maybe £5, that covers what it costs the bank (roughly £2/3) and a little profit on top.

FWIW, one £30 charge can start a chain of events that sees people spiralling into months and months of charges, they're then in a situation where they're trying to find more and more money every month that they don't have and the debt mounts up. The bank, however, just keeps charging.

I have no sympathy for the banks, and if it means I have to pay for my bank account, then so be it. For the greater good and all that.

quote:Originally posted by la psycho
i dont understand how a bank can justify a £38 charge for a direct debit not being paid.

id="quote">

Well it transpires that they couldn't justify it ?

Hh, isn't the court case to determine whether the charges are unlawful?

This whole thing pisses me off actually. If the court rules the banks must repay, then my charges will go up, and I will be subsidizing those who have mismanaged their accounts.

quote:Originally posted by NickJ
Hh, isn't the court case to determine whether the charges are unlawful?

This whole thing pisses me off actually. If the court rules the banks must repay, then my charges will go up, and I will be subsidizing those who have mismanaged their accounts.

id="quote">

I thought the Office of Fair Trading had already said that the charges for bounced DDs etc were unlawful, which is why so many people got their money back. This court case is something to do with overdrafts, I believe.

Don't try and make me use my brain ?

Well the banks have lost, so yes they are unlawful. Ner nicky ner ner ?

quote:Originally posted by NickJ
Hh, isn't the court case to determine whether the charges are unlawful?

This whole thing pisses me off actually. If the court rules the banks must repay, then my charges will go up, and I will be subsidizing those who have mismanaged their accounts.

id="quote">

AFAIK the court has ruled that they are unfair.

Looking at the other side of the coin Nick - one of the reasons we have so-called 'free' banking is due in part to the money generated by these charges.

Court says they are unlawful!

Roll on 22nd May when my case will be unfrozen and hopefully they will pay me back.

Sorry Nickj but if you don't liek bank charges business or personal there are ways round it. Business link are very helpful

Can see this one desending again ?

the fact is if they were unlawful, They should be refunded. and hobloodyray for people power for once.

quote:Originally posted by NickJ
Hh, isn't the court case to determine whether the charges are unlawful?

This whole thing pisses me off actually. If the court rules the banks must repay, then my charges will go up, and I will be subsidizing those who have mismanaged their accounts.

id="quote">

They subsidise you. You don't have a right to free banking. the only reason you don't pay is the fees are made up from these charges.

edited as that really didn't come out the way I wanted it too,....

quote:Originally posted by MBK
Court says they are unlawful!

Roll on 22nd May when my case will be unfrozen and hopefully they will pay me back.

Sorry Nickj but if you don't liek bank charges business or personal there are ways round it. Business link are very helpful

id="quote">

to answe this, and seversal other posts, I pay for banking our of choice. I have accounts which attract management charges, which I am happy to pay. I am not however happy for these to rise by n% because people are mismanaging their accounts. I do feel though that 30 plus pounds for going 5 quid overdrawn is utterly ridiculous, and it the charge ought to reflect the actual cost of dealing with it. I have no issue with the charges as they are being ruled unlawful, and hopefully they will be reduced to a level whereby it does reflect the true cost of dealing with it.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with this, because the retail banks are pretty much all in trouble of one kind or another, and I strongly suspect that this will mean the end of free banking, which is no doubt bound to attract a lot of whinging.