Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Thread-dumped? Bloody hell, technology moves quickly. Last year it was e-dumping, last week it was text-dumping and now it's gonna be thread-dumping...whatever next? Being dumped by letter?
Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.
All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
Ya well what do you expect.. she's only just found out your are a BAG-HAG.. personally speaking i'd act in exactly the same way.
"BA Group. The World's favourite CA Group"
HSBC 2 claims amalgamated. £1195. settled in full prior to filing claim.
BARCLAYS settled in full 2 days prior to submission of defence by Barclays
CAP ONE settled in full on day 14 of LBA (£210)
Hey wait a minute this is important. Vamps you are right - that means special treatment for staff, is that really allowed!
How does it work I wonder? Does a member of staff go in and remove the charge or is there an automatic buffer (used to apply at Abbey but they pulled the plug on it). If it's good enough for staff though surely it's good enough for customers.
Of course how it works may also give us more ammunition to attack the 'service' argument the banks so clearly love. Is there any way we can find out?
I think we have to be careful not to take these conversations out of context. We have other bank personnel who have indicated very vociferously that they have been subjected to the same charging regime, but cannot risk seeking repayment for obvious reasons.
Alan, Derby, UK.
PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING
EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS
Or you may wish to buy one of these great resources:
Click on the above link to place your order - payment by Paypal.
_________________________ _______
Sorry, but I cannot deal with your case by PM - please ask questions in your own thread. If you do not get a reply within 48 hours send a PM, with a link to the relevant thread, to any Site Team Member.
DO NOT SEND QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR CLAIM TO ADMIN, or our WEBMASTER - YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE A REPLY.
Advice given is purely my opinion, and is not based on any legal training.
Does your colleague really know what is happening with the household finances. I know my OH is unaware of things at times and I think that's because he is a bloke. Still this is not always the case and I am still concerned about what you say.
Thanks for the information anyway. No worries that you don't think you can get more. It's definitely one to be stored under 'interesting'. One day we might find out more.
I was more interested from the point of view of how it works. If the automated system merely ignores the fact that the account has gone overlimit it is good evidence that the actions are automated. The alternative is that someone at the bank sees the account in a manual intervention and sanctions what is happening - this is not very likely. However as Alan says staff can be penalised. BUT if the account is in the name of a spouse of staff the bank probably can't take any action. This implies that staff and family have a different signal set on their accounts. If his wife is canny enough she will have made sure it was in his name only so the bank can't touch her and any overspend is channelled through that account. Neat eh!
I used to work at a bank. I shan't say which one, but, well, it had connections to Shanghai..
Anyway, whilst it was nowt to do with my job, Oasis (the IT system there) allowed us to wander over all kinds of crap that was none of our business. That's actually directly linked to the reason I don't work there any more
Anyways, I used the system to check my bank balance. On there one could also see your 'buffer overdraft' which everyone had, and which was calculated with a 'system decision' - presumably based on the amount you pay in each month, a calculated probability that you'll pay it off (on, say, payday) and past performance (that's pure speculation, though)..
Which is why it's different for different people.. It's the 'system' being mean..
As an aside, there's also an accessible, pre-calculated 'pre-approved' overdraft figure for each account.. Turns out my old dear could have had a massive overdraft if she'd only asked..
As an aside, there's also an accessible, pre-calculated 'pre-approved' overdraft figure for each account.. Turns out my old dear could have had a massive overdraft if she'd only asked..
Ho hum
Not too great a thing though. They kept upping my overdraft limit and now I have a huge debt I can barely pay with no charges to reclaim. Grrrrr....
On there one could also see your 'buffer overdraft' which everyone had, and which was calculated with a 'system decision'
That'll be the manual intervention then (NOT)!
No wonder we get cross with the banks. They know it's all automated, we know it's all automated and they still think if they say it's not we will believe them.
Vampiress asked me this in a pm and I thought I'd put my reply on hear for all to see (hope you don't mind me saying so)
'I can't comment for certain, but it sounds like something known in the business as 'insider dealing'.
This is not only considered as gross misconduct and you'd be instantly dismissed, it's also v.illegal and the bank could take legal action as it's technically stealing their money. (although from all that's going on with charges I wouldn't like to be the solicitors arguing that one)
Capital One makes us do a training package on insider dealing every 6 months, they treat it that strongly. We're not allowed to look at an account if we know who it belongs to, even if it's our next door neighbous great aunty we only ever receive an xmas card from.lol '
So please don't think that bank staff get special treatment, that usually stops at being the guinea pigs to test the new offers. As soon as we mess up, we're treated the same as jane and john do.
Whistleblower, this is what I would expect every organisation to do. I know my employer does and I have seen good staff sacked for just looking. I actually expect my bank to be the same. It's the reason why I don't believe Ian Mullen and comments by the banks that not all manual interventions are recorded. They certainly will be because the bank as indeed any organisation will, want to be able to take action to prevent abuse. I also have a feeling they have to show they are complying with Data Protection Act in that information is only accessed and used for a business reason and no other.
I remember when Jill Dando was killed, some bank staff were punished or sacked for accessing her records, so it is clear that the banks do know and record what happens every step of the way. It just highlights that the statements over manual interventions being unrecorded are not sustainable.
Anyway rant over, sorry Vamps, hope we haven't got anyone into trouble
As anyone who reads the job pages for working in a bank will know you do get certain perks of the job and yes some fees are not applicable, however charges for returned DD cheques and card misuse are applicable. Youhave to remember Bank staff can check their account every day so they should not have problems with charges. Most banks DO have an automated system which will return DDs for some but not others
When I worked for vodafone it was the same, and we were not allowed to check a relatives account, however i know of staff who did.
Also I know for a fact virtually all computer systems leave a footprint of who has accessed a particular account, what time/date and thier user name.
Even if they do not amend anything or write notes, as soon as you type in an account number and access someones information you are automatically logged as doing so.
When I worked for vodafone it was the same, and we were not allowed to check a relatives account, however i know of staff who did.
Also I know for a fact virtually all computer systems leave a footprint of who has accessed a particular account, what time/date and thier user name.
Even if they do not amend anything or write notes, as soon as you type in an account number and access someones information you are automatically logged as doing so.
I used to work at a major law firm, who had a large contract for processing the conveyancing work for a high-street lender's mortgage applications. We (yes, i used to do it too) used to look up relatives'/friends' records to see if they had mortgages with this particular lender. There was also a "premier" version of the mortgage, for larger loans, and we used to scan this for celebrity mortages (Liz Hurley, Steve McManaman, Katie Price, John Snow).
I'm sure it's probably very tightly controlled/disciplined in banks/credit companies, but I think if you give a lot of low-paid staff access to a lot of potentially juicy iformation, the temptation will always be there to have a peek.
Banks have markers on those sort of accounts so that unauthorised use would be referred to a manager,team leader,etc,. Misuse is sackable because under the DPA it is illegal to view information about someone else when you are not dealing with them. And yes, we've all broken it.
Avoid being charged in the first place...
charged £50 for going over the overdraft
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by krakan
