Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

How much do u think it costs the bank 2 stop SOs (a question my bank manger asked me)


amanda8t1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6191 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

well erm.......

 

Standard letter (2 sheets) £0.20 (if it costs them more than this for paper and ink they should go to my local libary they charge 10p per sheet B+W)

 

Postage £0.32 (but they use a franking machine which means they get it cheaper because of the volume of mail sent out)

 

Someone to click refuse SO, click print and fold letter £5.05 (give them the benefit of the doubt it may have taken them 1 whole hour to deal with MY letter)

 

Envolope £0.10 (bought in bulk so probably less)

 

Equals a grand total of £5.67 ummmm...... why did I get charged £38 :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

well erm.......

 

Standard letter (2 sheets) £0.20 (if it costs them more than this for paper and ink they should go to my local libary they charge 10p per sheet B+W)

 

Postage £0.32 (but they use a franking machine which means they get it cheaper because of the volume of mail sent out)

 

Someone to click refuse SO, click print and fold letter £5.05 (give them the benefit of the doubt it may have taken them 1 whole hour to deal with MY letter)

 

Envolope £0.10 (bought in bulk so probably less)

 

Equals a grand total of £5.67 ummmm...... why did I get charged £38 :confused:

 

2 Sheets - 1p max for each sheet of paper and 0.6p per page printing.

 

Postage - franking machine costs 1p less so 31p

 

Folding and stuffing is done by machine

 

Clicking print is not necessary as software will do this automatically when it refuses a SO.

 

Envelope 2p max.

 

Do you reckon someone actually clicks refuse SO? I'm undecided on this. Even if they have to review your account I reckon max 15 mins and then once they decide to refuse, the rest happens as a computerised process. However, it's more likely that you have a shadow limit on yor account which means they'll pay stuff up to this level automatically and then refuse anything automatically when it gets above this limit. Therefore the entire process is probably completely automated apart from ongoing reviews of shadow limits which again will probably be automated depending on how much your salary is each month.

 

So, I reckon it costs £30 maximum.

 

Now to the million dollar question - DID YOUR BANK MANAGER TELL YOU? How much it costs I mean? If so, please tell. If not, ask them! Is he a smart ar5e having a dig at you or was he agreeing that charges are HUGE?

 

OC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Big organisation use either mailsort of walksort bulk mail services from the Royal Mail. Walksort, which has a minimum of 4,000 items per mailing (which big banks will do no problem), charges 20p/item upto 100g. If you use OCR (and I think some of them are), you can get Mailsort down to 16p...

 

I did a bit of work for a major water company a few years back, and they reckoned that a customer statement cost between 4-6p to generate. This included the load/unload time on the room sized printer (they used a forklift to load the paper on!) and the envelope stuffer, the amortisation of all that expensive gear and trained monkeys to fix it when it started shredding 3-acres of paper per second.

 

So, only including these costs - 20-26p.

 

What you/we are forgetting of course, are the staff that are employed in the customer services departments and the cost of deploying all the sundry computer equipment and software. By my reckoning though, if the banks are truly spending all of that £4.7bn of penalties on staff, the UK banking industry employs 174,000 people to handle bank charges.

 

This doesn't seem likely.

A&L: Settled - £6,200

HFC: Settled - £800

Shell Visa: Settled - £250

Egg: Settled - £700

Mint: Settled - £1200

RBS: Settled - £850

 

The opionions in this post are guaranteed to conform to the laws of physics, but pretty much nothing else...

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you/we are forgetting of course, are the staff that are employed in the customer services departments and the cost of deploying all the sundry computer equipment and software. By my reckoning though, if the banks are truly spending all of that £4.7bn of penalties on staff, the UK banking industry employs 174,000 people to handle bank charges.
Not to forgeting of course, that all these people work nights, since this is when most automated transactions happen.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And according to Citicard they are applied at exactly midnight on the day the offence took place,so some of the staff must be part time.

 

cheers

andyace

 

( 5% is a good deal to me )

cheers

andyace

 

 

citicards= £650/settled £650

Alliance and Leicester= £1534/request for payment sent/LBA sent/standard refusal/moneyclaimsent/settled £2003.36

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to forgeting of course, that all these people work nights, since this is when most automated transactions happen.

Better yet, if they only actually work for the two hours before and after midnight(when all the charges are applied), then my maths is out by a factor of 4 - which means that 700,000 people are employed (part-time) to do this. Which is odd, because according to Amicus, the entire industry, including all aspects of finance, only employes 1 million...

 

The number was based on the employees earning the UK average salary of £27k. But as it seems likely they've outsourced it to a former colony, I guess it would be closer to 3,000,000 people? Which would be impressive. We're single-handedly keeping a working population the size of Birmingham in full employment!

 

We should be so proud...

A&L: Settled - £6,200

HFC: Settled - £800

Shell Visa: Settled - £250

Egg: Settled - £700

Mint: Settled - £1200

RBS: Settled - £850

 

The opionions in this post are guaranteed to conform to the laws of physics, but pretty much nothing else...

Link to post
Share on other sites

And according to Citicard they are applied at exactly midnight on the day the offence took place,so some of the staff must be part time.

 

cheers

andyace

 

( 5% is a good deal to me )

 

 

Maybe its done by the R.Whites Secret Lemonade drinking bear................he is always very active at midnight .........

 

 

:D

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and yet, for Barclaycard, Barclays and Abbey, it only costs £3 to go and sort through millions of records, in big boxes, to dig out a microfiche of your statement.

 

 

Hmmmmm..?

If you feel that we have helped you, or you would like to help keep this web site running so that others can continue to get their money back, please click the donate button at the top of the forum.

Advice & opinions of Dave, The Bank Action Group and The Consumer Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

------------

 

 

Add me as your friend on FaceBook - I need all the friends I can get :-(

 

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=577405151

 

------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my opinion on the costs to the bank of these transactions.

 

For a bank to stop an internally initiated payment (SO, Online Payment, ATM) will cost as much as 0p - the computer decides that it won't do it and doesn't - no cost at all.

 

For an incoming request for payment (Cheque, DD) there may be a cost of up to 20p to reject the request - although in truth it will be a lot lower than that due to the way they aggregate incoming and outgoing costs between banks.

 

For a payment to be made when there are insufficient funds - no more cost than if there were sufficient funds - or approx 0p.

 

For being over your limit - 0p. There is no cost, and in fact the unauthorised rate kicks in and more than compensates them for the 'inconvenience' of lending you a bit of money (unsecured loans available at 6.9% APR - unauthorised rate of 29% APR).

 

The only cost left then is the letter which is automatically printed out (pre-signed), folded and stuffed by a big machine and put into a prepaid, walksorted envelope and posted at heavily discounted rates - cost 25p. If you have online letters and statements then the cost is so close to 0p that you would need a lot of decimal places to represent it - just a tiny amount of storage space for the letter and a minute bit of bandwidth to send the notification email.

 

The rest of their charge - profit, shareholders payouts, directors payouts, greed and profit. Oh - and did I mention PROFIT? :o:o:o

Jeep (The Wife & I)

Halifax joint a/c (£3800 charges + £40 interest on charges over 11 years) - paid in full 23/06/06

Halifax joint a/c new charges £1100 - LBA sent 02/08/06

Halifax 2nd a/c (£1500 charges + £150 interest on charges) - partial payment received 13/07/06 (no s69 interest) - AQ filed 07/08/06 - Court awarded 50% of s69 interest (Bank didn't turn up!)

Halifax Visa (#1) Data Protection Act sent - statements arrived - £350 so far

Halifax Visa (#2) Data Protection Act sent - refunded £170

DONATE - Support this site, it supported you!

Follow the route: FAQs > Template Library > Parachute Account > Bank Forums > Spreadsheet

All advice given in good faith and without prejudice or liability, to be taken at your own risk!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my opinion on the costs to the bank of these transactions.

 

For a bank to stop an internally initiated payment (SO, Online Payment, ATM) will cost as much as 0p - the computer decides that it won't do it and doesn't - no cost at all.

 

For an incoming request for payment (Cheque, DD) there may be a cost of up to 20p to reject the request - although in truth it will be a lot lower than that due to the way they aggregate incoming and outgoing costs between banks.

 

For a payment to be made when there are insufficient funds - no more cost than if there were sufficient funds - or approx 0p.

 

For being over your limit - 0p. There is no cost, and in fact the unauthorised rate kicks in and more than compensates them for the 'inconvenience' of lending you a bit of money (unsecured loans available at 6.9% APR - unauthorised rate of 29% APR).

 

The only cost left then is the letter which is automatically printed out (pre-signed), folded and stuffed by a big machine and put into a prepaid, walksorted envelope and posted at heavily discounted rates - cost 25p. If you have online letters and statements then the cost is so close to 0p that you would need a lot of decimal places to represent it - just a tiny amount of storage space for the letter and a minute bit of bandwidth to send the notification email.

 

The rest of their charge - profit, shareholders payouts, directors payouts, greed and profit. Oh - and did I mention PROFIT? :o:o:o

I think you've summed it up excellently.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

the primary role of a bank is to borrow money at a lower rate and lend at a higher rate. The profit from this activity should be sufficient to cover the overheads and the staff costs. It can be argued that whilst calculating the cost of intervention to stop a DD or bounce a cheque etc should not involve any other overheads except for variable costs such as staff or material used such as ink, paper, postage etc. I would guesstimate that it would take no more than 1 or 2 mins of someones time to perform such an act.

 

If the banks attributed any overheads towards performing the above tasks, then they would be at a loss if all of a sudden every customer starting running their affairs in order and they were not able to recover the shortfall through penalties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in the business division of a well known cable company in the UK, designing data and voice networks for business customers. The profit model is based on a cost + approach, whereby I design a network, and work out the costs associated with it, and it goes to a pricing team to fix a 'price' (the '+' but of the cost + model). This price includes all the opex and a certain % for profit.

 

If that certain % was anything like what banks unlawfully charge, our entire debt (before we had to be 'restructured') would have been wiped out overnight. The problem is, we would have had no customers base, 'cos they would have moved to another provider, i.e. what we have is proper competition (caveat, I can only speak for the Business division of this Cable Company, not the consumer, just in case anybody bemoans about how c**p cable is.....)

 

My point here is that the banks are in effect a cartel. There must have been collusion at some high level at some point between banks to 'fix' these charges, in the full knowledge of their true costs.

 

 

RBS Account 1: Won

RBS Account 2: Won

Capital One: Won

Capital One (Wifes Card): Won

RBS Account 2, round 2: Won

RBS PPI: Won

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My point here is that the banks are in effect a cartel. There must have been collusion at some high level at some point between banks to 'fix' these charges, in the full knowledge of their true costs.

 

Totally agree, consumer have no choice but to settle for the best of the worst.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that no single bank can undercut any other on their charges to attract business.

 

They have to be kept high for this very reason

PPMAN159

 

If this comment has helped please click on the scales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheet of paper £0.05

Ink £0.01

Envelope £0.03

Frank £0.32 ( or thereabouts)

Training for the pond life who only has to press a button. 3 days @£5.50/hr = £132.00

Total £132.41

 

 

Wiping the smile off their face when getting your refunds

 

PRICELESS:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ask a Bank manager how much does he think it costs you to claim you penalty fee of £30 back???

 

Your time writing letters 5 hrs at £10 per hour. £50

Telephone calls £ 5

Paper envelopes and stamps £ 5

£60

 

Whose the loser even if they give you your £30 back????

 

sparkie 1723

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...