NatWest Charges- A guide

[yourbank]

Statement information going back to October 5th 2002 should become available over this weekend. If the account was opened within that time friame, then from the account being opened to today will be coming online this weekend.

[NATre]

Hi there,

 

I am an international student banking with Natwest. Today Natwest charged me £38 for not having sufficient money in the account for a direct debit transaction which takes place on 22nd of every month. I was told by the bank that the University tried to withdraw money from the account at 1.30pm and I only manage to transfer money (internal transfer, which I assume to be immediate) at around 4ish.

Do you think I could claim a refund for that sum?

[yourbank]

Hi there,

 

I am an international student banking with Natwest. Today Natwest charged me £38 for not having sufficient money in the account for a direct debit transaction which takes place on 22nd of every month. I was told by the bank that the University tried to withdraw money from the account at 1.30pm and I only manage to transfer money (internal transfer, which I assume to be immediate) at around 4ish.

Do you think I could claim a refund for that sum?

 

If its your first charge on the account then ask them if they are able to refund the amount as a gesture of goodwill, if not then it is the normal reclaims process.

[NATre]

I have spoken to the branch manager today and explained to him my circumstances and disappointingly I was informed that he has no discretion to return me the money. He said unless it is a case of hospitalisation and bereavement, his hands are tied.

 

He told me to write in and he will forward my letter to the relevant department.

 

My position is that I'm leaving this country in 3 weeks time and will not be back until sometime in October. Then again, my stay in October is only for no more than 3 weeks.

 

What should I do? Should I proceed to write the letter or is there another channel where I could air my grievance more speedily?

[susmags]

hi have sent a letter to nat west asking for my charges back as i thought they was unfair this was well over a year ago i had i letter from them saying they thought the charges was fair will anything be happening or should i apply again

[bustthematrix]

Hi

 

Concerning taking the fight to Natwestie on the Bank Charges front, please see the excellent work done by BankFodder (I believe) at

The Consumer Forums - FAQ - How do I reclaim my bank charges if they have been misrepresented

 

We need to find clear statements by Natwestie that their bank charges are not used for what they said they were to the OFT. This should be fairly simple if we all work together to gather the evidence that CAG is seeking and forward it asap. These would come from

 

1. Letters responding to Bank charges claim requests

2. Any copies of Terms and Conditions or any other printed material where the bank has justified it's bank charges on a basis different to that with which it 'won' it's bank charges appeal at the SC.

 

To that end, according to one of the letters I received from Natwestie in the past, the document which would clearly set this out would be Natwest's own published document titled 'Personal and Private Banking - A Guide to Fees and Interest'. Ideally, perhaps, for each year covering the duration of the period of one's claim.

 

I wonder, if one can't find this document (most of us trash that stuff don't we ), can we ask the bank to send it to us? Of course, if they know the statements therein might implicate them in the light of their dodgy defence to the Supreme Court, they might not want to part with this readily.

 

Either way, I think it's up to all Natwestie customers to band together and try and make these resources available as part of the evidence Library CAG is building to mount these new claims on the basis of Misrepresentation.

[bustthematrix]

Hi All

 

Concerning taking the fight to Natwestie on the Bank Charges front, please see the excellent work done by BankFodder (I believe) at

The Consumer Forums - FAQ - How do I reclaim my bank charges if they have been misrepresented and other associated articles.

 

We need to find clear statements by Natwestie that their bank charges are not used for what they said they were to the OFT. This should be fairly simple if we all work together to gather the evidence that CAG is seeking and forward it asap. These would come from

 

1. Letters responding to Bank charges claim requests

2. Any copies of Terms and Conditions or any other printed material where the bank has justified it's bank charges on a basis different to that with which it 'won' it's bank charges appeal at the SC.

 

To that end, according to one of the letters I received from Natwestie in the past, the document which would clearly set this out would be Natwest's own published document titled 'Personal and Private Banking - A Guide to Fees and Interest'. Ideally, perhaps, for each year covering the duration of the period of one's claim.

 

I wonder, if one can't find this document (most of us trash that stuff don't we ), can we ask the bank to send it to us? Of course, if they know the statements therein might implicate them in the light of their dodgy defence to the Supreme Court, they might not want to part with this readily.

 

Either way, I think it's up to all Natwestie customers to band together and try and make these resources available as part of the evidence Library CAG is building to mount these new claims on the basis of Misrepresentation.

[bustthematrix]

I've just seen a copy of their current leaflet titled 'Personal and Private Banking - A Guide to Fees and Interest' and on page 4 it outlines 'The price for your banking services'.

 

In this current version it does include 'our overdraft and unpaid item charges (section 7)' and this would suggest that their argument before the SC was consistent. However, I suspect this is not the case with older versions of this leaflet as this one may have been hurriedly amended late last year when the barristers for the banks decided this was the argument they were going to stick with in appealing the Bank charges decisions which had gone against them beforehand.

 

Thinking of which, would anyone have details of the earlier defences posted by the banks when they initially lost and kept re-appealing it all the way up the chain? Again, their defence statements in those instances would be quite helpful to clear things up.

 

It would appear to me that for the Misrepresentation argument to hold water, we'll need past issues of this leaflet in particular where this clause was not inserted here as well as various correspondence from the bank.

[indebtstudent]

I am looking in my fiels for such, really would be interested if ANYONE has evidence on this like copies of old leaflets or letters etc. It really bugs me that the banks have not told the truth from the outset, and the media have not made anything of this.

 

Two things come to mind. Given that they've made statements as part of a defence to County Court claims, which they flatly contradicted in thier pleadings in the Supreme court, aren't they guilty of contempt of court?

 

Wouldn't the sort of info we need be covered by a subject access request? You can ask for anything but surely if you ask for all hostoric T & C's and at least the info provided in the leaflets if no originals of the leaflets exist.

[bustthematrix]

IDS

 

You're thinking along the right lines. As you well know, the banksters don't play fair, they play to win period and will try and get away with whatever they can.

 

That said, it's in all our interests to get this evidence however we can and share it to Bankfodder et al for the evidence library.

 

How do we get hold of the past statements and defences they put in for the earlier cases that they lost before appealing to the Supreme Court? I wonder if they've implicated themselves in those defences?

 

The more of us that come forward with whatever we can find will help build a picture towards this.

[indebtstudent]

"How do we get hold of the past statements and defences they put in for the earlier cases that they lost before appealing to the Supreme Court?"

 

That should be the focus, that and the other documents.

 

I've no problem with playing to win, but if you make a statement which you swore to, then flatly contradict it, well I don't think that's anyway to go on in business or in life generally.

 

Its a bit like that blatant handball by Thierry Henry. The authorities did bugger all thus saying to children everyway its ok to cheat so long as you get away with it and benefit massivey from it. And they wonder why things are going downhill...

[bustthematrix]

Of course IDS. I am in no way legitimising their actions - just exposing the nature of the beast!

[letsgetitsorted]

As this thread is entitled Natwest Charges I thought I should mention here.

on looking at our account balance this morning i noticed that there was a charge on our account, this charge was for an unpaid direct debit, however it was not for the usual £38 or £35 but it was for and wait for it £5.00b yep that is £5.

 

does this mean they have seen sense and reduced their level of charges...

any thought or comments

[bustthematrix]

As this thread is entitled Natwest Charges I thought I should mention here.

on looking at our account balance this morning i noticed that there was a charge on our account, this charge was for an unpaid direct debit, however it was not for the usual £38 or £35 but it was for and wait for it £5.00b yep that is £5.

 

does this mean they have seen sense and reduced their level of charges...

any thought or comments

To a degree. They started this policy for BOTH Natwest and RBS accounts late in 2009, around September I think. I also think it shows they were probably not expecting to win the SC decision. They may now be kicking themselves for doing this ahead of time though as £5 is quite a ways from £35-£38. What I suspect is that going forward, when and if the 'heat' ever goes away concerning bank charges, they'll start increasing them again in some manner.

 

We'll have to see the outcome of some of the current challenges to bank charges using the new POC arguments.

[bustthematrix]

Another way of looking at it is that RBS is now somethin like 80% government owned so they may have been pushed in this direction from behind the scenes.

[indebtstudent]

"Another way of looking at it is that RBS is now somethin like 80% government owned so they may have been pushed in this direction from behind the scenes."

 

I don't buy this though, with Northern Rock, which the government fully owns they have pointed out time and time again that it is run at arms length. Same with RBS, I believe the initial comment, similar to those that were exressed at the time, that it was a good poker hand. If they lost well they look more reasonable than others, if they don't well its good PR I suppose.

 

Whilst I welcome the move and will admit they seem to be the best bank if you know you are going to have unpaid items. Well apart from Halifax but thier new charging structure seems designed to price people out o having OD's altogether. But it frankly irritates me that they try to maintain that the change is in a no way an admission that the charges were too high before (when the justification for such amoutns WERE cost).

 

I do not believe they are now losing £33 per time, in fact I believe the cost would be minimal for automated transactions since there is really work involved. I DO feel they should, where they have done people real damamge, offer at least the difference, because however they try to spin it on some level this IS an admission.

 

Other charges have also reduced but are higher than £5. Its remarkable is such a fiercly competitive market (this is what the banks call it) there hasn't been more innovation in this regard. There again you could point out that the new metro bank is the first NEW entrant to the market for 150 years and say this stuff about competition is therefore pish.

 

I hope the next government shows some backbone on this issue.

[Michael Browne]

 

NatWest Charges: The Definitive Guide(Updated March 2010)

 

Well the basics of charges is statements and knowing what the charge is for so we have 4 basic charges all claimable. The fifth one there is on the basis that the other four have caused the problem to arise and therefore they are penalising you more.

 

1) Unarranged Borrowing Fee or Maintenance Charge-- This is when you have an overdraft or do not have an overdraft and you go over that. The bank charges through charging periods which last a month and the charge goes out at the end of the month.(This was until April 2009 when it changed so the charge goes out 21 days after the statement date)

 

2) Unpaid Item- this appears on the statement and is when there is not sufficient funds in the account the previous working day(mon to Friday) to cover either a cheque, a direct debit or standing order to cover the amount going out. The bank "bounces" or does not pay the item and you get charged for it immediately. (This was until June 2009 when it changed so that charges for this goes out 21 days after your statement date)

 

3) Card Misuse or Guaranteed Card Payment Fee(gtee card pymt)--This is when an item is paid by switch and goes through the account when the account is over its agreed or unagreed overdraft.(This was until June 2009 when it changed so that the charges for this goes out 21 days after your statement date)

 

4) Referral Fee-- This is when an item is, rather than bounced is paid which takes the account over an agreed or unagreed overdraft by more than £26. Three charges maximum a month on that last one. (This was until June 2009 when it changed so that the charges for this goes out 21 days after your statement date).

 

5) Card Recovery Fee- This is when someone comes round to your house to recover your bank card

 

 

We have the main charges so what is the amounts i am looking for?

 

1) Unarranged Borrowing/Maintenance Charge

in 2000 it was £14 which then increased to £20 from April 2003 and then £28 from September 2004.

 

2) Unpaid Items

In 2000 it was £30 which went up to £38 from March 2005 (for businesses this is currently £35) Edit: From November 2007 max charge per day is £114 or three items.

 

3) Card Misuse or guaranteed Card Payment Fee-

In 2000 this was £25 and then went up in March 2005 to £35

 

4) Referral Fees

It was £25 per item(maximum of £75 per month). This changed in September 2004 to £30 per item(maximum of £90 per month).

 

5) Card Recovery Fee ---£125(not aware if any change to this charge has occurred)

 

This is the basics to charges and does not include Advantage Gold and Unarranged Borrowing/Maintenance Charges.

 

Since the guide was updated in August 2009 a further change has occurred.

 

As of the charging period following 1st October 2009* the charges are as follows:

Maintenance Charge: £20.00 per charging period

Unapaid Item: £5.00 per item and maximum of 10 items per charging period.

Guaranteed Card Payment: £15.00 per item and maximum of 7 items per charging period.

Paid Referral Fees: £15 per item and a maximum of 6 items per charging period.

 

 

 

*Charging periods and how the new charges come in(1st October 2009) :

 

Charging periods are now based on your bank statement date. If you have statements on 1st of the month then 21 days later your charges go out. Furthermore, if the charging period is the 1st of the month then the new charges will come into effect on that date and in November the new charges will be taken from the account. However, if your statement date is 31st of the month then until that date you will be dealt with under the old charges regime until 31st October 2009. You can change the statement date to coincide with the start of the month which would take effect two months later.

 

 

Advantage Gold Accounts

 

Advantage Gold is a service fee so cannot be claimed* and Unarranged Borrowing/Maintenance Charge is going over an arranged or unarranged overdraft without prior consent which can be claimed. A quick tip as to whether it is or is not an Advantage Gold account is that at the top of the statement it says Advantage Gold. If it was converted back the fee goes out at the end of the following month. The bank has changed the name of Unarraged Borrowing to Maintenance Charge on August 10th 2007.

 

 

*The exception to this is if you can prove that you could not benefit whatsoever from the account ie car breakdown cover and you do not drive or medical reason why you cannot travel abroad. In this instance you may be able to reclaim partially based on what you have benefitted from.

 

Some background info first

 

In 2001, NatWest was taken over by the Royal Bank of Scotland Group and replaced the NatWest computer systems as well as aligning charges to the RBS Bank model of charges. That means that the Advantage Gold charge and the Unarranged Borrowing Fee were put together as one from October 2002.

 

How much was Advantage Gold and what was the amounts in question?

 

I am taking my starting point from when it was unclear so October 2002 so, for those that, are claiming so we have the charges as follows:

 

October 2002: The Advanntage Gold fee was £6

September 2003: The fee went up to £9

From July 2005: It was £10

From June 2006: It was £12

From April 28th 2008: It is £12.95

 

quick note though, during 2002/3 there was a special charge for certain people trialling the newer Advantage Gold benefits which was £7.50.

 

So how do I work out what is the Advantage Gold and Unarranged Borrowing charge?

 

31 jan Charges 02jan-A/C XXXXXXXX £40

 

 

The statement may say charge £20 so that is £14 Unarranged Borrowing and £6 ADGD fee,

 

or £29 which is £20 Unarranged Borrowing and £9 ADGD fee, or £37 which is Unarranged Borrowing and £9 ADGD,

 

or £38 which is £28 Unarranged Borrowing and £9 ADGD,

 

or £40 which is £28 Unarranged Borrowing and £12 ADGD fee

 

or £40.95 is £28 maintenace charge and £12.95 Advantage Gold.

 

However, if you converted the account back from advantage gold partially through the month it may have something like this 31Jan06 charges £34.50 which is £28 Unarranged Borrowing and £6.50 ADGD.

 

 

Please be aware that since November 2008 the charges have appeared as separate entries on the statements.

 

 

Customer can choose to pay £10 a month and their unarranged fees will be reduced.

 

Maintenance Charge £17

Paid Referral £17 (max £51 per calender month)

Guaranteed Card Payment Fee £17

Unpaid Item £17(maximum £51 per day)

 

 

Letters have been going out in November 2007 offering this option.

[Vaiovaio1]

Natwest hide charges so if you challenge a charge they just refer you to their conditions. If I were to use my visa debit card to purchase say a piece of furniture costing £301 no fee would be applied to this transaction. However, to purchase foreign currency for the same amount from my holiday company they add £4.50. How is this a cash advance?? The money is in my account so they are not advancing me cash. The Banks service is so poor that I never go into a branch and only ever use on line banking. I would change banks but as a bank pensioner I do get some perks. I am ashamed to tell people that I worked for 'RIP OFF NATWEST'.