Taking responsibility for your own actions

[The_UnknownWarrior]

I've read a number of threads on these boards today and I have to say I am at a loss to understand most of you.

Yes we all know that banks make their money by charging people, I'm not even going near that.

Most people have a free bank account, ie there is no monthly or annual fee to use the service, IF you abide by the terms and conditions.

But it seems that alot of you want the banks to pay YOU for borrowing money that isn't yours.

If I went up to someone in the street and took money from them without their permission I am stealing. You if you take money from the bank that's not yours you want it free???

I think it's time people stepped back and took a good long look at themselves. Who are the bad guys? The people charging you for borrowing their money? or the person stealing it without permission.

It's not that hard to run a bank account without getting charges. All you have to do is live within your means.

I used to work in a call centre, and I'd see people running up huge debts, and charges. They would cancell their DD's to the mortgage company, the car insurance, the life insurance, etc, but never their DD to Sky. Odd that. If you're in that much trouble, talk to the bank face to face in a branch, or the companies who you owe money too.

People need to take responsibility for the own actions. If you spend money that you're not entitled to your gonna get charged. DEAL WITH IT.

[Michael Browne]

If you're in that much trouble, talk to the bank face to face in a branch, or the companies who you owe money too.

Here's a prime example of how the banks deal with someone who does just that:
BBC NEWS | Business | Reader diary: Dealing with my debt

Yes we all know that banks make their money by charging people, I'm not even going near that.

Why on earth not? Could it be that their charges are unlawful and therefore rather inconvenient to the rest of your post?

[postggj]

i think i should point out most banks are covert in there actions
5 years ago i suffered from id fraud..
they only got 150 from my account but within a month through there charges it was 1500
they took my monthly salary, and there response was tough luck
it took a court claim to rectify the matter
you cant live on air.
if they charge they have to justify those charges and not use it for obscene profits as they have a duty of care to there customers.
try reading the threads more, a lot of people through no fault of there own are driven to despair by the banks attitude, when things get tough they dont want to know
you cant justify a 30 charge for going one pence over drawn.
last point is what about companies who call dd early. you set a date usually when you get your salary, dd gets called early no funds so the company charge you and then the bank
is that fair
i know the banks are there to make money but not at there customers expence

[The_UnknownWarrior]

Originally Posted by Michael Browne

Why on earth not? Could it be that their charges are unlawful and therefore rather inconvenient to the rest of your post?

Unlawful? That's still to be decided by the courts.

But.

When opening an account you agree to the T&Cs. You sign a contract. If you break the contract you want to get away with it?

Wow.

What's unlawful about someone charging you for taking money that's not yours?

Banks are in business to make money. They are not a charity. Like most people I do think that the charge are too high. But I agree with them. What better incentive is there to manage your money better then to know if you don't you're fined?

If you really feel that charging people for borrowing money that isn't theres can I have your money please?

[Michael Browne]

Unlawful? That's still to be decided by the courts.

This is true, but if the banks really believe their charges are lawful, why have they refunded literally millions of pounds rather than test their case in court? Over the last two years they have had tens of thousands of opportunities to do just that, yet have failed to do so. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why.

[The_UnknownWarrior]

Originally Posted by postggj

i think i should point out most banks are covert in there actions
5 years ago i suffered from id fraud..
they only got 150 from my account but within a month through there charges it was 1500
they took my monthly salary, and there response was tough luck
it took a court claim to rectify the matter
you cant live on air.
if they charge they have to justify those charges and not use it for obscene profits as they have a duty of care to there customers.
try reading the threads more, a lot of people through no fault of there own are driven to despair by the banks attitude, when things get tough they dont want to know
you cant justify a 30 charge for going one pence over drawn.
last point is what about companies who call dd early. you set a date usually when you get your salary, dd gets called early no funds so the company charge you and then the bank
is that fair
i know the banks are there to make money but not at there customers expence

When I dealt with complaint calls over charges I was alway sympathic to the customers needs, and always tried to help - even to the point of breaking company guidelines, and thus putting my own job on the line.

However, there seems to be a group of people out there that think they have a right to "demand" (not "ask for" but, demand) their charges back.

When you have someone shouting abuse down a phone to you for over 30min, because they ran up hundreds of pounds in charges by writing out cheques with no money in the bank (and thus committing fraud), blaiming you, you do tend to lose interest in them, and not go out of your way to help them. How many people reading this thread treat call centre staff they way they'd like to be treated themselves?

Regarding your point about DD's I agree, to a point. The company is at fault for claiming early. One company I worked for only claimed on the date, or after, NEVER before. But there are some companies out there that do like to call early - but this isn't the bank fault. A DD is an agreement between a company and the account holder, the bank has very little to do with it. When I have had trouble like this in the past I have always claimed the bank charge back from the company who caused the charge.

And my personal advice - never use DD's - always Standing Orders - you control them.

[The_UnknownWarrior]

Originally Posted by Michael Browne

This is true, but if the banks really believe their charges are lawful, why have they refunded literally millions of pounds rather than test their case in court? Over the last two years they have had tens of thousands of opportunities to do just that, yet have failed to do so. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why.

No it doesn't.

It's called Public Relations.

Better to say - "yes have the money back as a gesture of good will", while not admitting anything.

Who wants to go to court and risk massive amounts of bad PR if things go badly.

Seems too many people got greedy in asking, and thats whay they banded together to go to the courts.

[Michael Browne]

However, there seems to be a group of people out there that think they have a right to "demand" (not "ask for" but, demand) their charges back.

Absolutely, I would demand the same of any organisation making unlawful charges

[The_UnknownWarrior]

Originally Posted by Michael Browne

Absolutely, I would demand the same of any organisation making unlawful charges

And with an attitude like that I don't think many people would be will to go out of their way to help.

[vortex]

Tis the season to be merry, Merry Christmas Everyone.
Please stop drinking again. This old chestnut rears its ugly head again. Unknown Warrior----You are in dangerous territory because there is a huge number of examples of threads started by people on charges sites with this perspective.

- No court has decided that bank charges are a penalty. The Law is there and business charges and credit card charges are being successfully challenged without a specific precedent being set. Commercial decisions to settle could be that they would lose in court and that maybe if they appealed they would lose and set a precedent.

- You should have read what you signed up to.
Do we all read the minutiae of what we sign every single time? Did we all trust the banks years ago when we did?

- The argument is that you don't want the bank to charge you anything and want it for free.
Incorrect because the banks have every right to charge you for a breach of contract except that it should be at the level which is the cost to the bank, which, at the moment it is not. Free banking does not exist anyway.

- it is easy for someone to live within their means.
This is an old chestnut moral superiority argument that I am better than you. It is of course a nice argument except that life is a soap opera and things happen that take that budget out of what you expected.

People who live in glass houses should be careful of the stones that will be thrown at them.
Your position is admirable but seen it before <<yawn>>>
Nothing new to the argument <<<yawn>>>
Have a good Christmas I have better things to do with my time than to get involved with this old chestnut argument that always arrives on the forums when things are quiet. hint to others on that last point.

[Michael Browne]

No it doesn't.

It's called Public Relations.

Well, in that case they need to change PR advisers,because it's not working. They've had more adverse publicity in the last 12 months than they've had in the last 12 years.

[The_UnknownWarrior]

Can't be fracked to carry on with closed minded people.

Good luck in getting your charges back - just remember you're dealing with real people so treat them with respect.

And we'll see in Jan who wins.

[Michael Browne]

Seems too many people got greedy in asking, and thats whay they banded together to go to the courts.

No it was because they knew they were in the wrong but were haemorraging so much money that it was really hurting and this was the only way to get a nine month breathing space whereby they could stop refunding charges, but still carry on imposing them

[tonycee]

Originally Posted by The_UnknownWarrior

Seems too many people got greedy in asking, and thats whay they banded together to go to the courts.

What a stupid comment.
Like the banks are gonna give us something that isnt ours.
Legalized extortion. But not anymore.

Originally Posted by The_UnknownWarrior

Can't be fracked to carry on with closed minded people.
Good luck in getting your charges back - just remember you're dealing with real people so treat them with respect.
And we'll see in Jan who wins.

Bye bye then. Happy Christmas.

Originally Posted by Michael Browne

No it was because they knew they were in the wrong but were haemorraging so much money that it was really hurting and this was the only way to get a nine month breathing space whereby they could stop refunding charges, but still carry on imposing them

MICHAEL BROWNE FOR PRESIDENT>>>>>>>>

[Rooster-UK]