Try being a bit more responsible

[Guest Alison82]

Thanks for your comments Dan; sorry you feel they were a bit much; I don't (e.g. when my bank charges me £35 for doing over my limit by £2 for a £2 dd to the nspcc). Don't mean attack you personally Dan (your the only one that has bothered to post here) but the whole banking industry in general.

 

 

Saving would be wonderful but unfortunately you do not know peoples individual circumstances, but with the money I will be claiming back (that the banks have been nicley looking after for me) will be going directly into a savings account so I will not be in this situation in the future.

[gothicf0rm]

i agree with you about responsibility. what annoyed me is the bank settled out of court but still said the charges were all my fault. almost every charge i have ever had has been the fault of someone else, if i dont have money i dont spend it. i havent had loans, credit cards, store cards or anything like that, just a simple overdraft.

i cant charge someone whatever i like when they break the law and steal my intellectual property, i have to actually show the level of the loss to the court and prove it. all english law works around the basis of the harm principle, if the punishment outweighs the harm then it is unlawful. thats why we dont get billion pound lawsuits here like in the usa.

its not about regulation or overzealous laws, the laws are hundreds of years old. its about the very basic cornerstone of english common law that should be applied to banks as it is applied to everyone else in the business sector. i cant get away with what they do (my clients would sue me) so why should they?

[shifty50dog]

Hi Dan

could you answer this for me .

Pending charges the halifax charge me when i do a switch transaction or write a cheque but my wages still get into my account before these transactions come into the bank yet they still charge me would you not call

that a greed penalty.Awaiting your reply with interest.

thanks peter

[tempest]

Dan,

Went out today and spent a couple of quid in McDonald's (hated doing so as I dont like teaching the kids the habit of fast food), So what did I get for that couple of quid (£1.99) Well we got a cheesburger (Warm), Fries (Moderatly-warm), Coke , packet of sauce, straw, knapkins,One happy kid ! Crappy plastic toy (to me I know but it keeps kids quiet) and a box to put it all in when you see a rubish bin, now I know McDonalds isnt good and is considered a rip off but compare it with.

 

 

 

 

50p overdrawn, Well what do we get, One crappy letter, envelope, postage paid. £38 Gone......

 

One unhappy customer !!

[Natasha]

If you have got suh a problem with people misusing their accounts then why doesnt the bank just decline the transactions ???

 

Then there would be none of this mess!!

[Cowpat]

Some of them decline the transactions and charge you £30 anyway. And list it on the statements as "Interest" :-}

[paganheart62]

I have been struggling with bank charges for years, yes i am in debt, yes i am on a very tight budget and yes i go overdrawn and get charged. Like most people I have no problem with the bank not paying my bill if I have insufficient funds but I do object to paying £36 for the "pleasure" because that then puts me further behind and the chance of something else going wrong increases. Hence more charges hence more behind i get. Yes its in part my own fault but the fact is if I had lots of money the banks would bend over backwards to accomodate me and I doubt very much that I would pay any charges.

 

To the point that we sign a contract with the terms and conditions laid out. Yes we do, however what choice do we have. I could understand your argument if some banks did not charge and I chose a bank that did. But I have no choice all banks charge the same and as I am working and my wages need to be paid into a bank account I am left trying my best to juggle everything. I could pay my bills in cash as they come but then I get penalized again becasue its more expensive if you dont have a direct debit set up.

 

In short the banks know we have to use them and they are exploiting that position, if there was another way to do things I gladly would. I do try to balance eveything but when you only have a finite amount of money coming in a finite amount of bills going out then any charges exceed my outgoings and mean I have more going out then coming in, so which bill do I not pay? And before you ask I am with the CCCS in an attempt to sort out my problems so I am living on the thightest budget possible with no frills. I would like to go to the bank and try to talk to someone, but as everything is done by computer and the old fashioned bank manager that was allowed some discretion to think for him / her self is long gone thats another option thats no longer available.

 

Im sure many will agree with me that banks and debtors in general always go after the people that can least afford it and have gotten into trouble.

 

Yes my problems are partly my own fault but inflexible and irresposible banks have not helped. Just one example I have a loan I could no longer afford the repayments for due to a change in circumstances. I rang them immediatley and they said well tough you have to keep up the payments. They then started charging me, of course, and then they callled and offered me a new loan secured on my house, which the original loan was not, for the next 25 years which would have taken me to the age of 70!!!! when i refused they threatened court action, luckily I then heard about the CCCS and they helped me and then suddenly they dropped all charges and reissued the loan knocking of the interest. However they have not quite given up as I still have to pay an axtra £6 a month becasue they are not happy with the payment they are getting via the CCCS.

 

Sorry to rant on a bit but I do not mind banks in general but they are very inflexible (when you have no money) and run a very tight monopoly with no other choices.

 

Regards

Paganheart

[Thevisitation]

I've just a couple of things I'd like to say. Firstly my bank says that it may not pay cheques, card transactions, etc if it would take me overdrawn, however it will let me go £300 over my overdraft limit without a word. I've done it, not intentionally mind, and I never received a letter, a phone call or any other form of contact. It just amazes me that they charge so much for

reviewing unauthorised overdrafts (Terms & Conditions)

when they obviously don't. The reason I know is that part of my overdraft was a temporary overdraft which was supposed to be reduced by £50 a month and that was over a year ago and nothing has happened.

 

Secondly banks don't want us to be sensible and keep to our limits as they can charge us when we don't. They don't make a big fuss about it because it's more money for them. If charges reflected the costs involved in administering these breaches then they would have some kind of policy in place to reduce the number of breaches and therefore their costs. If it is as I suspect that they make a good deal of PROFIT from these charges then they want us to be a reckless as possible and will not discourage us from our wicked ways.

 

Generally I'm of the opinion that Banks are some of the most unhelpful organisations around. I don't blame the people that work there as we all have to make a living and generally it's not the people on the ground who make policy.

[stenmeister]

When Yorkshire Bank had a branch in our home town, they would call us if something was going to bounce and one of us could pop in to the branch and pay some cash in to cover it. Now they've closed both the branch in Stevenage and Hitchin, I work 30 miles away and my wife doesn't drive - the nearest branch is in Luton. Last month I realised that they were going to apply their £20 charge despite there only being £19-odd in the account and tried to make a direct transfer from my bank which would clear a day later than the charge was due to be taken, so I sent them a secure message to advise the situation and could they please not hit us with an £8 charge now and another £20 next month.

 

They charged us, the reply to the secure message just said 'sorry, not our department, you'll have to speak to Luton' and that was it. So we'd made every conceivable effort to put money into the account and they still charged us, and the only thing that was taking us overdrawn was them applying their own charges!

 

It is hard when you are on a tight budget and a low-ish income to be exactly within your boundaries each month. It is easy to make a mistake. And the banks know this, and exploit it.

[Rebel UK]

Hi Dan,

 

Thanks for posting here, it is quite brave of you, and I'm being sincere not sarcastic. I did some quick maths this morning based on my knowledge of computers, the limited information my bank gives about their charges and my understanding of the employment and wages fields, I came up with the following....

 

The bank (any bank) charges £25 for a letter sent informing of exceeding my overdraft limit, they also charge me £35 for doing so and state both these charges are to pay for the costs of me going past my limit. Let's see now, a printer (standard printer) takes about 8 seconds to print one A4 size piece of paper, lets say it takes about 20 seconds for one person to fold and seal the envelope (I'm going to disregard the £35 for the moment) so in One minute of work, two letters can be sealed ready for posting to the 'culprit' correct by my estimation. So 60 minutes in an hour, let's see 2x25= 50 and 50x60=3000 so thats £3,000 an hour the bank charges simply for producing and readying the letter to be sent, how many letters and how many branches send these letters every week I wonder, and how many bank employees are on £3000 an hour ?

 

I think I'll charge my bank £50 for each letter I send them and when they refuse to pay it and I threaten court action, do you think they will let it go to court ?

 

Thanks dan

 

Rebel

[Dammam]

When Yorkshire Bank had a branch in our home town, they would call us if something was going to bounce and one of us could pop in to the branch and pay some cash in to cover it. Now they've closed both the branch in Stevenage and Hitchin, I work 30 miles away and my wife doesn't drive - the nearest branch is in Luton. Last month I realised that they were going to apply their £20 charge despite there only being £19-odd in the account and tried to make a direct transfer from my bank which would clear a day later than the charge was due to be taken, so I sent them a secure message to advise the situation and could they please not hit us with an £8 charge now and another £20 next month.

 

They charged us, the reply to the secure message just said 'sorry, not our department, you'll have to speak to Luton' and that was it. So we'd made every conceivable effort to put money into the account and they still charged us, and the only thing that was taking us overdrawn was them applying their own charges!

 

It is hard when you are on a tight budget and a low-ish income to be exactly within your boundaries each month. It is easy to make a mistake. And the banks know this, and exploit it.

 

This is a very good point. I would imagine that there has been a rise in dissatisfaction with banks and their charges that mirrors the decline of the local Bank Manager who is a respected part of the community and who you could go and see if you had any financial problems.

The advent of centralised management and the rise of the call centre has lowered the banks' outgoings, but has raised customer dissatisfaction.

[noelvance]

At the end of the day, we should all manage our accounts to prevent these charges being applied. But...

1. Anyone with children (3 in my case) will understand that you can't budget for everything, everday and sometimes you just have to wip out the debit card and go for it.

2.Even with internet banking, it's hard to check your a account twice a day to ensure you havn't slipped over the limit.

3.People running cars / bikes / whatever incur costs that you can't budget for. Things break down, wear out, fall off and you not everyone has money left over to pay for these incidental charges.

4.Houses, flats, bungalows etc also throw up costs that you can't always budget for. Why should the banks punish us for things that occur in everyday life?

5. Nobody wants to go over their limit by £10.00 and incur £30.00 charges, we'd all rather have that money to spend on things we need, not lining banks coffers !

 

I hope this isn't seen as a rant, I've worked on the customer facing side of motor retailing & repair and I can understand why Dan's said the things he said. It's no different in the motor trade, most main dealers charge £70.00 + per hour to fix your car when most mechanics are on £10 - £15 per hour. People would call that greedy, and to some extent they're probably right. But very few complain about it because a car is a status simbol to a lot of people, whereas you dont go around waving your bank statement in the air !

 

Good luck in getting your money back (I wonder how they'll recharge it back to us in the long run?)

[gothicf0rm]

dan will be thrilled to know that as well as not accepting liability for their own mistakes (like entering a minus instead of a plus to my balance and cancelling my card and marking my account as default!) and me having successfully sued the bank the bank now threatened to close my account if i ever get another charge ever. naturally ive closed my account, closed my business account too and moved elsewhere. who's the irresponsible one here? the lawbreaker that refuses to do business within the boundary of the law or me?

[markhypno]

I havent read through all of the replies in this topic, so my apologies if this has already been said.

 

The poster of this topic says that the charges are a deterent and that that we should manage our accounts better. I would have thought that having direct debits and important cheques stopped because of insufficient funds would be deterrant enough, all my bills are very important and will do anything to pay them, i dont want to made homeless, or have my gas turned off through non payment. The only difference bank charges make are to make it even harder to keep the account in order.

 

Nobody in their right mind would run over their limits because it would simply mean they are no longer able to pay bills.

 

Mark

[Vampyra]

Thevisitation said they were allowed to go £300 over their limit without a word - my bank have just sent me a letter with an intended issue of a default notice which is the first REAL communication I have had from them stating I am over my limit - by £600 which I may add has only taken since the end of January to mount up to £600 and I've been with another bank for over a month!

[brecken]

Oh dear me dan, I really hope you never experiance what it is like to not having enough money to cover expences, this can arise for all sorts of reasons often out of the individuals control.

unemployment

sickness

divorce

death in the family,

or maybe a dose of reality is just what you need.

[Bidilly]

Maybe Dan should read some of the stories and understand how "acting responsibly" can actually lead to the bank taking the mickey...

 

But in case he can't be bothered, here's my wife's latest run-in. Her first in 10 years of banking with RBS.

 

Her current account had the proceeds of our house sale in, to cover the bills for getting the new house fixed up. Someone at the bank obviously decided they saw a commission opportunity, and sold her on a new savings account. They transferred all the proceeds into the new account, reassuring her "It's OK, you can get instant access."

 

When she got home, she double checked the balance of her account, and realised that a hefty cheque for building work hadn't yet gone through, so phoned the bank to transfer the money back into the current account to cover it. "Sorry, because it's a brand new account it doesn't exist on our system yet, call us back tomorrow"

 

When she got in from work the next day, she phoned the bank. The cheque had hit the account that day, so she asked to transfer the funds. And was told "Sorry, we can do that, but since it's now after 6.30, this cheque will show as taking your account into an unauthorised overdraft and you'll be charged." Yeah, cheers.

 

So, Dan, what should she have done that was more responsible?

[rivendale0506]

Is Dan still on his holidays? He hasn't posted for ages....... :?

[Spiceskull]

He might not have a had a job to come back to...I think he gave rather a lot of ammunition out to people, and feel certain that his posts would have been scanned by his employer...

[richardc]

Is Dan still on his holidays? He hasn't posted for ages....... :?

 

Thank you. I was just about to ask the same question.

[heppy23]

 

Let's see now, a printer (standard printer) takes about 8 seconds to print one A4 size piece of paper, lets say it takes about 20 seconds for one person to fold and seal the envelope (I'm going to disregard the £35 for the moment) so in One minute of work, two letters can be sealed ready for posting to the 'culprit' correct by my estimation. So 60 minutes in an hour, let's see 2x25= 50 and 50x60=3000 so thats £3,000 an hour the bank charges simply for producing and readying the letter to be sent, how many letters and how many branches send these letters every week I wonder, and how many bank employees are on £3000 an hour ?

 

The only humans to touch your letter will have been from the post office and you when you opened it.

Bank letters are printed on mass by very fast printers. The letters are folded and stuck in envelopes by special machines.

I work in mail order and we get offered these machines but we don't need them as we don't do bulk mailing.

These letters are then often posted in such a way that they cost less than a first class stamp to send (look up things like mailsort and walksort on the royal mail site if you want).

 

It is computers that are spurting these letters out. The humans that "sign" these letters should be ashamed of themselves.

I got a letter the other day to say they had paid a standing order to my baby sons savings despite the lack of money in the account. The standing order is for £2.50. The letter says they "might" charge me.

[richardc]

Thanks for your post. Could you let us know a bit more about this. It seems outrageous.

[Spiceskull]

It's standard practice in all fulfilment houses, and yes, there is a reduced rate of postage for a guaranteed volume of business.

 

After all, the postie is visiting no.s 3 - 33 Festive Row, what matter if he delivers 15 extra letters at a 2p discount?

 

As banks are mercenary, it is beyond comprehension that they do not use fulfilment houses...

 

And not only that, bank clerks are on (sic.) £7.50/hr, fulfilment monkeys are lucky to get half of that...(no offence meant to fulfilment monkeys - they are as abused by the banks as the rest of us...)

[Slapps]

ok i'm lost as alot of you seems to know about a letter?

everytime i have been charged £30 for a bounced dd i got no letter

all i get is a few extra lines on me statement that doesn't even tell me when they r gonna take the charge, so i then have to ring them up so that i don't get another charge for not having their charge in my account.

 

thank you for my rant i need to go and charge up again now lol

 

Slapps

[mancalledsmith]

Yes I am in a similar boat with abbey, they charge me twice for a direct debit failing but I am not informed until the same direct debit has been put through twice and then failed to go through, therefore incurring a £70 charge!!!! I ignored this the first time I noticed it, mainly because I have a young child who has been ill a lot, and just before christmas my son was in hospital with chicken pox that had become infected with a strep A, basically his life at risk, and the bank was charging me £70 because my mortgage had bounced. I phoned them up and said it was unfair, because I spent most of christmas in hospital, and that no letter was sent to me the first time the direct debit went through. If I had known I would have made funds available. The person on the other end basically said I should keep a track of my account - and that I should not pay by direct debit as he pays everything by cheque - which is what I try and do now, although I have put in the first letter about my charges, lets see what happens. But is this normal practice not to be informed of the first direct debit failing? And does this make sense sometimes I think faster than I can type