Here we go:
COMPLAINTS about 'rip off' bank
overdraft charges have hit record levels, figures show.
The number of people complaining to the
Financial Ombudsman Service soared from 60 a week in May, to more than 150 a week in October.
In some cases, customers have run up hundreds of pounds in charges after going just a few pence overdrawn.
With complaints expected to hit 10'000 this year, the chief
ombudsman has warned banks to start acting fairly when handling claims for compensation.
He accuses banks of giving customers the run-around by paying back the charges only to those who are prepared to go to Court or make a complaint to the
ombudsman. And he threatened to make a legal ruling that will force banks into paying back all charges. Instead, he wants banks to accept that their charges are unfair and refund them when customers complain, rather than resorting to delaying tactics and bargaining over how much they should refund.
Banks will charge customers as much as £39 for going beyond their
overdraft without permission, and slap on a further charge of around £25 for every
direct debit or transaction that is then bounced or allowed to go through.
On top of this, the banks will charge an
interest rate of close to 30pc on unauthorised overdrafts. The charges can often send the customer overdrawn again, plungin them into a spiral of debt.
These charges are feeding record profits of a combined £34 billion at the big five banks - Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds TSB, RBS, NatWest and HBOS.
Many, including the OFT which has launched an investigation, believe that these charges are illegal because they amount to an unfair penalty rather than being a true reflection of the cost to a bank when a customer overspends.
The OFT is expected to make an initial decision early next year. In October it demanded that banks impose a £12 cap on charges for customers who go over their credit card limit or make a late payment.
In the past 6 months, thousands of customers have demanded that the banks reimburse charges - banks initially reject such claims. But if the customer complains again, many banks will offer to pay back a proportion of the charges.
Only if the customer then goes to Court or registers a complint with the ombudsman will the charges be reimbursed in full. But the banks always back down before a court or ombudsman ruling can be made, to prevent any sort of precedent being set.
Chief Ombudsman Walter Merricks believes that if banks reimburse those customers who are prepared to complain several times, then they should have to pay back money to everyone who makes a claim.
He says ' This sort of horseplay is bad. It seems inequitable that you will pay back money to some consumers just because they are prepared to be persistent'
Mr Merricks warns that if banks failed to pay back consumers, or if the OFT investigation was lengthy, then he would be forced to weigh in with a ruling that could force banks to reimburse customers.
Money Mails award-winning Fair-Play on charges campaign has helped thousands of readers claw back charges since May. The campaign has revealed other dirty tricks that banks use, including closing the accounts of customers who win back charges, and putting black marks on their credit records.
Marc Gander, a campaigner from the Consumer Action Group which gives advice to bank customers wanting to reclaim back their charges, says: 'These charges are a rip-off. Banks have perfected the art of giving their customers the run around'.
'Complaining about your bank can be a very stressful and daunting process, so they weed out the faint hearted. This means that many people drop out before they claim all their money and this results in the banks saving money'
A spokesman for the British Bankers Association says;' We are involved in a dialogue with the OFT at the moment and we take on board the conerns with the ombudsman and will be discussing these with him.'
'Our members believe that their charges are transparent, fair and legal'
The Daily Mail (today) - Banks told: Don't be artful dodgers 
