Prelim letter with estimated charges sent on main account. Decided not to wait on DPA request being fulfilled and to get a request for repayment registered before the end of the month. LBA sent on wife's account to arrive on Monday.

I just typed the URL into my browser and the site appeared! But seriously, I had been searching on Google for Halifax and excessive charges or something similar.

Surely if all the banks are issuing roughly the same schedule of charges, and those charges are known to be unlawful then there must be a cartel in operation otherwise one of them would break ranks and undercut the others. :o I'm in agreement with Bookworm on the charges - I think that the premium they make on the excess overdraft interest more than covers the miniscule cost of processing. I'd still be happy to pay a £1 - £1.50 charge for stopped payments to cover the bank's costs - this still gives them a profit margin and helps to offset the cost of providing 'free' banking services. I would be far happier as well if the bank just stopped the payment without charges when there were insufficient funds and left it to me to sort it out. I also agree with the opinion that if the bank allows a payment out of your account (whether it is making a payment that exceeds your limit or deducting a charge) when it is already overdrawn, then the overdraft on the account once the payment has been made IS authorised. By letting the payment go out they are authorising the new balance. Cheers.

I understand what you're saying, but I feel it would be a good way to publicise the charges and the vindictive action taken by the bank because they lost the argument and had to pay up. Cheers.

I've just used the new spreadsheet and added almost 10% to my wife's basic claim. What I ended up doing was to use the lowest balance in the preceeding month as the balance, especially as in many months there was a credit balance at the date the interest was deducted. If I didn't do this I ended up with no interest to claim back in that month even though I was being charged interest (if you see what I mean). I'm sure that my method doesn't skew that figures too much - it is only an estimate based on the data available (and without access to a mainframe data centre ). Also the way HFX charge their interest is not (usually) for the current month, but the one preceeding it. I took this into account when I calculated the balance to use. Anyway, thanks for the spreadsheet - I was wondering the best way to claim this related loss back. Cheers.

I understand that I can ask the bank to remove any default notices they have put on my credit file as part of a settlement - I intend to ask for defaults on the mortgage and credit card accounts to be done at the same time as they are with the same bank, and would not have been in default if the bank had not taken the charges in the first place. But what about other credit defaults? I have loan and card accounts with other lenders who didn't get paid on time for the same reason - due to there not being enough left in my account to pay them because of the charges. So strictly speaking those defaults are valid as far as the lenders are concerned, but they all come down to the same basic reason - excessive and unlawful bank charges. Is there any way to get these defaults removed or otherwise negated? Cheers.

Purely hypothetical in my case - watching the Bailiffs program on BBC earlier in the year made me wonder if there are ways of protecting your property - I think there is a gross unfairness in the way the system works. I realise that many people whose cases were shown only have themsleves to blame - didn't pay the fine when they should have done, and ending up paying far more than it would have cost. But in a lot of cases when goods are seized they are auctioned off for the lowest bid and don't raise anywhere near what they are worth. A TV with a value of say £100 in one of these trade-in places (modern pawn shops) is seized and makes £10 at auction - where is the fairness in that? By the time these vultures add on their 'charges' the amount to be repaid can be many times the original debt so the goods don't really make a dent in it. The debtor will have to replace the removed goods at some time in the future for many times the amount that was was raised on the seized item, so they lose out again. Personally I think that the whole debt recovery system stinks - everything is weighted in favour of the big financial institutions and the man in the street is walked over, and crushed into the ground without anyone standing up him. A similar thing happens when a company that is going bust carries on trading and taking money on orders knowing full well they can't supply the goods. The poor consumer ends up funding what is owed to the bank (who get the second slice of the pie after the taxman) by the business and gets nothing in return except maybe a few pence in the pound if they are lucky. Rant over! Cheers.

I like the idea of a BAG T-shirt. I could wear it every time I visit the bank:razz::razz:!!! It could also be a revenue earner for the site. Could we have a design competition and get to vote to choose three different designs? There's a site in the States (cafepress?) that does sponsored merchandise although it might not be the best deal. I'm wearing one of their T-shirts now bought via another site. (Baggy Boys - Fight for your RIGHT for a REFUND!) Cheers.

I'm seriously thinking of selecting a bank, walking into the local branch and asking to open an account. When we sit down to do the paperwork and they ask me to sign the contract I will strike out the fees for unauthorised overdrafts and change the charges for unpaid / cleared payments when over limit to £2 and then initial the changes and sign the contract. I really want to see what they do! I realise that they will probably say 'Thanks, but no thanks', but it gives the chance to raise the real costs with a bank in person without taking on your own bank. I'd just like to see them try and justify the charges! One argument would be that you are saving them from prosecution by removing illegal clauses from their contract. Obviously I won't do this at the bank that I intend to use for my parachute account (yet). But if I find a bank that will accept the changes I will probably sign up with them on the spot (and frame the contract )!!! Cheers.

I'm not in that position - although it's not impossible that this could happen in the future - I was interested in the legalities - would they still be able to seize, what would the letter have to say, what witnessing it would need, etc. It would be nice to know that there's a way to protect certain assets, like family heirlooms, etc that are worth far more to you than the monetary value they might raise at auction. Is there any special protection for data - if they seize a computer with your personal data on it - what rights do you have over the contents, and what protection from having it made available to the buyer? These are things that I've been wondering for a few months now. More out of interest than anything so far, but also to make sure that if I can take such action I can do so early enough to make it effective. Cheers.

General question concerning baliffs and recovery actions: - Is it feasible to protect your valuable possessions from these vultures by having a letter of assignment (if that's the right term) passing the ownership of certain named items (or even the entire contents) to a family member over 18 who has no debts? Cheers.

Standard complaints letter received today. Will be sending LBA a week on Monday on the wife's account. Noticed that the letter states (in reference to the DPA letter on the joint account): In my letter I asked for all statements since the account was opened (much further back than 6 years). Can they ignore that request? Q to mods - should I run these two accounts in separate threads? Cheers.

I think there is also the (small) matter of getting Bank of England approval - I'm not sure on this, but I think you have to have a large security deposit and major assets to back up the institution - bonds/indemnities/bits of paper, etc. You are also not allowed to use the word 'Bank' in your business title without approval as far as I remember. Cheers.

Has anyone got the data to work out the average claim per customer per bank - using the survey data I suppose? It would be interesting to know which are the best & worst for unlawful charges. Cheers.

I have the suspicion that the reason they like it so much is that they can easily claim that the fault is yours - "If YOU didn't let someone know YOUR PIN then how did THEY get hold of it?" - and it's hard to prove otherwise, therefore their liability is removed, and passed pack to YOU. Mind you, I have seen terrible examples of PIN entry with people standing back and jabbing at the keys almost at arms length and making no attempt to obscure the numbers they are pressing - I always have my wallet in my left hand to obscure the view from that side and my other hand over the keys to avoid being seen. Cheers.

I think I would use the term 'Credit Card Account No. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and all its predecessors' - it should cover the change of account numbers. Cheers.

If CnP is doing such a good job to prevent fraud, why haven't we seen a reduction in interest rates on credit cards and a reduction in bank charges to reflect this fact? Surely one of the reasons why they claim to charge such high rates is to cover their losses (i.e. pass them on to us), and if those losses have reduced then we should benefit. Cheers.

As far as I can see we have 'lent' them money from our accounts over a period of years. During that time they have charged interest on that money when we have been overdrawn, and if the money hadn't been taken, we would have earned interest on that money - so we are losing out twice. If the recovery of the money taken is done in a way to restore that interest (which in my opinion it should be) then I suppose we would be liable to be taxed on the interest regained as we would have done had the money remained in the account. I think that the court should be able to require the banks to restore the equilibrium so that we are not out of pocket for the offence. Cheers.

Just got me thinking - if the overdraft is caused by the bank paying out when there are insufficient funds, or by taking extra charges then it must be authorised borrowing otherwise they would have taken money from the account... Cheers.

I think that there should be a case for the bank to be made to restore the charges to your account retrospectively, so that they put back a charge on the day it was taken and recalculate the balance forwards based on the interest rates as they changed from that date forwards. Only then would you be in a position that you had suffered no loss. This also wouldn't affect the value of the claim (as far as I can see) as you are just having your financial position restored by the sum of the charges taken. There is still an argument for the 8% court interest on top of the charges (but not the restored interest) reclaimed for loss of that money over the period. Cheers.

In most cases I get a paper bill anyway - phone, cable, CCs, etc. The others like gas & lecky, mortgage, loans, etc. are on fixed payments (mainly). Once a week you log in to your account and pre-book the payments that are coming due, making sure that you have enough to cover them and wherever possible they are paid on time. You even have the option of making a part payment to show good faith if there's not enough and you are waiting for something to clear, etc. If a SO is unpaid you get charged by the bank just the same as a bounced DD or cheque - but at least the payee doesn't get to retry and force extra charges on you. Just my thoughts on the matter - I don't know how well it would work in practise - but it's definitely what I'm thinking of doing when I get my refunds - I need to get back control of my money and stop funding the bank's boardroom!

You'd also have to take your own money! Cheers.

Hi, Wouldn't a manual payment via online banking be a better option (if this option is available with your account)? That way you have full control of the date and amount. With a SO it may still come out when the money isn't available. The downside of removing DD is that many organisations give a discount for paying that way which you will lose - but it may be better if you get to retake control over your payments. Cheers.

Is it possible to request that any refund of charges is applied to the account retrospectively so that interest charged by the bank is refunded and interest earned is added back? This would put you back to where you would have been had the charges not been applied originally and would therefore be a true reflection of the true cost of the charges. Cheers.

If they take that line with me I'll copy it straight to Watchdog, Which?, Trading Standards and the national papers. Cheers.