Jump to content

crfx250

Banned
  • Posts

    780
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by crfx250

  1. The waiver conditions state banks should not ''Make matterialy adverse changes in the level of it's unauthorised overdraft charges (or in the way it applies such charges to it's customers' account which could amount to customer abuse'' But the FSA said after the review: ''Have they moved the charges definitively against the interests of their customers? We have not seen any evidence of that." ''The possibility that a few people might have been disadvantaged did not mean the waiver should be cancelled''
  2. Charges probe will hit profits, says HSBC By Peter Thal Larsen and Kate Burgess Published: November 23 2007 20:36 | FT.com The chairman of HSBC, Stephen Green, on Friday warned of a profits squeeze in the UK banking industry as a result of regulatory scrutiny of bank charges and the growing power of consumers. Mr Green said a legal challenge to banks’ overdraft charges, due to be heard next year, could “change the economics of retail banking” in the UK, while growing use of the internet had made it easier for consumers to shop around. “The net outcome of that is not that retail banking is going to become a low profitability business,” he told analysts Friday. “But it is going to be less profitable than it is and is going to be growth constrained.” The warning from HSBC, which controls the UK’s fifth-largest retail banking network, highlights the continuing pressure on the industry following a sharp increase in bad debt charges last year. However, Mr Green was confident HSBC could buck the trend by concentrating on younger and wealthier customers and by offering them wealth management and insurance products. On Friday HSBC ruled out large acquisitions in the US, western Europe or in investment banking as it set a target for raising the share of profits from emerging markets to 60 per cent from 51 per cent in the first half of the year. The pledge underlines the change of direction at the bank since Mr Green’s predecessor, Sir John Bond, stepped down in May 2006. Executives insisted they had no plans to withdraw from the US, where the bank has been hit by significant losses in the subprime mortgage meltdown. But Mr Green hinted at possible disposals. “If there are areas of business where our capital is not earning a return and there is nothing we can do to restructure the business . . . then we will follow through on that.”
  3. ''Senior HSBC executives should be denied millions of pounds in bonuses next March because the bank’s incentive scheme was misrepresented to shareholders and was therefore void, according to a hard-hitting legal opinion'' Investor claims HSBC misled shareholders over bonus plan - Times Online
  4. Here's the video YouTube - Bank Charges Anthem by Oystar ft. the Money Saving Expert
  5. Hey if you play your cards right maybe the mods could make it a sticky
  6. ''my words i lay down the gauntlet which to any one would mean end of conversation'' It means nothing of the sort. It means ''an offer to challenge'' ''Obviously as you say many people are reading this thread,so would they still have the confidence of joining another group when it has been quite clearly stated by you that PM's would be made public if not answered'' But it was my pm! It might have been sent to you but the words belong to me.
  7. I'm sorry. I was under the misunderstanding that the whole point of usernames was to retain a degree of anonymity. And no I stand by everything I write.
  8. Yes I know! I've already acknowledged that many times now! Geeez
  9. ''you state that asking for your user name is not a reasonable'' Yes and I think most people would agree ''yet you ask me to name a site as i referred to as OTR'' Which I think was not unreasonable. You started a thread critical of a site but without clearly naming it you stifled any possibility of a reasonable chance to answer or even discuss it. ''because i haven't you made public a Private Message wow talk about pot kettle black'' I could have easily have posted the contents of the pm rather than pm it first. And I think you're using your pm beef to cloud the inadequacies of your arguments. If you have a problem with it then file a complaint.
  10. ''Please give me the definite name of the other site you are connected to and not just the initials'' I have. Read post #13 ''do you on the other site that you are connected with ,send out a Private Message and then if you get no answer post it for public view.'' Yes ''Please tell me what's your user name on the other site and your position'' I don't think that is a reasonable question ''once again give me the name of the site and i will tell you yes or no.'' For fear of repeating myself - we've covered this. I've given you the name and you gave me an answer
  11. ''once again you continue a thread that no one has an interest in'' 941 hits? ''in fact i can't understand your remarks of (wager) to name the site'' It couldn't be clearer ''As for your remark YOUR beloved CAG where does that remark come from'' Well it's my remark (?) Inspired by your post #29 ''To clear your mind please post the other site that you are connected to'' Bit confused on that one as earlier in your post you already confirmed I've done that ''You were the one who named another site '' ''To clear your mind please post the other site that you are connected to'' See previous answer i will respond with a post as to whether i was refferring to that site Again you already have. See post #14 Anything else?
  12. The changes to the indiscribably useless Banking Code which take effect in March next year have been announced. They include ''prohibition of account closure solely because a customer has made a valid complaint'' and ''Greater certainty in cheque clearance'' which APACS Chief Executive Paul Smee hails that ''for the first time customers can be sure that six days after paying in a cheque the money is definitely theirs. This is great news for all customers''. Yipee. BBA - British Bankers' Association - New Banking Code ensures fair deal to customers
  13. post counts in the alterego profile are zero as this user has only posted in BG
  14. Well at least Rooster got one thing right. BG posts are not counted, a perfect example of which is Alterego aka Bankfighter aka blueskies.
  15. I did pm setmefree a very fair opportunitity to not only prove himself right and myself wrong but to raise some substantial and much needed funds for the site. But regrettably setmefree, motto: 'long live CAG' couldn't find the time to respond. setmefree I couldn't help noticing your ''lay down the guantlet'' post on my thread and I thought I'd lay lat mine too. I think we should settle the matter of which site you referred to in your original thread by way of a wager. I propose we bet any sum of your choosing. The true identity of the site can easily be verified with your cooperation. And the winner to donate the sum to your beloved CAG. So either way CAG benifits. I don't think I could be much fairer And If you have the courage of your convictions then I would expect you to accept the challenge. crfx
  16. The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has defended its decision to keep in place the "waiver" that allows banks to put complaints about overdraft charges to one side. First put in place in July it was renewed this week ahead of a High Court test case early next year which may settle the legality of the banks' charges. Some consumer and campaign groups have criticised the waiver as being one-sided and unfair to bank customers. But Clive Briault, a senior FSA executive said: "The aim is not to disadvantage people, the purpose is to get the legal certainty and deal with the complaints on the basis of that." New charges The consumers association Which? has taken a dim view of the FSA's approach. We have not seen any evidence of that Clive Briault, FSA Its personal finance campaigner, Doug Taylor, said thaty since the test case was initiated in July, some banks had "muddied the waters by amending their terms and conditions to make their charges appear fairer". "We do not agree with them [the FSA] that everything is working as it should," he added. "The FSA needs to be more proactive." Mr Briault replied that the possibility that a few people might have been disadvantaged did not mean the waiver should be cancelled. "What we are doing is reviewing very carefully if there are any individual firms that are not complying with the conditions of the waiver," he said. "Have they moved the charges definitively against the interests of their customers? We have not seen any evidence of that." However not everyone is convinced. "Not only have the banks continued charging, some have made their fee structure even more punitive to consumers," said Martin Lewis of the campaigning website Moneysavingexpert.com. Credit cards I n April 2006 the banks agreed, under pressure from the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to reduce their default fees on credit cards to £12. If there has been evidence of the banks using our waiver to delay handling other complaints then that is something we want to see evidence of Clive Briault, FSA That left some people trying to recover money paid before the agreement was in place. But there have been examples, in some local courts, of barristers representing banks arguing that the general halt to overdraft claims should also mean a halt to the return of credit card charges. Both the OFT and the British Bankers' Association (BBA) have said explicitly that the two types of claim should not be confused. And Mr Briault added that such behaviour by banks would be a clear breach of the conditions of the FSA waiver. But he said the regulator had not been given any direct evidence that this was actually happening. "If there has been evidence of the banks using our waiver to delay handling other complaints then that is something we want to see evidence of," he said. "That would sound contrary to the conditions of our waiver." Confusion Some apparent confusion over the issue has been revealed at the highest level of the English and Welsh judiciary. One bank charges campaigner, Bob Egerton, wrote recently to the Lord Justice Moore-Bick, the deputy head of civil justice. In response, Lord Justice Moore-Bick wrote that it was "for the judge who deals with each case to decide what course to take in the light of the evidence before the court". "However, I imagine that one thing judges will wish to take into account is the existence of the OFT proceedings," he added. So the door has been officially opened for local judges, under pressure from banks, to overturn what had been regarded, until now, as an industry-wide settlement. "It is our impression that it is standard practice," said Marc Gander of the Consumer Action Group (CAG). "It is disappointing that the courts, who should know better, are going along with it."
  17. That has already been looked into and the FSA had a legal right to grant the waiver. However their maybe the possibility of a challenge to the review itself and that is being looked at right now albeit by a lowly solicitor as opposed to a barrister for the time being, and I'll get her opinion by tomorrow. Although having said that she is head of litigation at a large London law firm and at an eye-watering £350 an hour she's somehow reasuringly expensive. And not to mention rather attractive. Profiles - FSI
  18. I couldn't agree more Shazza! Here's what the consumer panel have said: Financial Services Consumer Panel | Press Release | Financial Services Consumer Panel calls for better compensation
  19. This is what the FSA have said when I asked them about the duration of the waiver: ''As you may be aware, in order to determine the relevant legal issues in an expeditious, fair and orderly way; the OFT and banks have agreed to have the test casedetermined in two stages. In summary, stage one of the case will focus on the determination of whether the relevant terms and charges can be assessed for fairness under the UTCCR 1999, and whether they are a charge for a service or a penalty in respect of breach of contract at common law. These are known as 'preliminary issues'. However, once the OFT has concluded it's investigation, and in the event that the arguments it has put forward in stage one are successful, then issues of fairness and genuine pre-estimate of costs/penalty will be determined subsequently at stage two of the proceedings. These are referred to in the test case as the 'substantive issues' ''
×
×
  • Create New...