Sister v LLoyds Bank accounts and Credit cards.

[Mistermind]

Opalie, I would assume the size of monthly lawful interest is dwarfing previous penalty charges, so this is the priority issue. If Lloyds agrees that the cardholder is in difficulties they will consent to suspend interest for 6 months, then review. They have also been known to completely cease applying interest, and settle for monthly payment. For this to happen Lloyds require the filling in of Income and Expenditure form as a means test, and to either suspend or terminate interest, they have the requirement of stopping use of the c.c. PERMANENTLY.

 

Unlike other banks, when Lloyds grant c.c. to Lloyds bank account holders, they make sure the cardholder will sign an agreement enabling Lloyds to transfer money out of bank account into c.c. Your sis is likely to have indicated her current account number, not her rent account.

 

If you wish to retrospectively challenge Lloyds helping themselves to rent money, you would have to pore over the wording of the agreement sis signed and no doubt still has a copy, whether the wording was sufficient for Lloyds to walk into her unnamed rent account. If the wording was watertight and Lloyds enthusiasm had exceeded their discretion, then you have the possibility of reclaiming aforesaid unauthorised transfers, plus compensation for the distress and embarassment caused -- not only did Lloyds help themselves, they did so without warning before or after rent day! Seeking a view from the Lloyds side, does the account name indicate it was a rent money account, so that Lloyds cannot now say that to them it was only account A and account B, they were not to know account B held rent money, off limits except to the account holder.

 

If you wish to commence battle with Lloyds, I should try the interest suspension/termination route first. This would be administered in Brighton office, but if you make huge waves on the second issue, the bank could use the c.c. situation for retaliation.

 

GL, and what a heartwarming story, sisters closing ranks against bloodsuckers.

[Mistermind]

Account closure is brutal retaliation for persons not well placed to open another account elsewhere. The FOS rapped A&L for this, fining them £125 which they gave to the victim, but not much consolation there.

 

Your LBA is unlikely to trigger retaliation, outcome to depend on the High Court test case. If what figure the OFT has in mind is known to anybody on this site, he or she would certainly be unable to tell us. Several circumstances, however, are not encouraging.

 

On 5th April 2006 the OFT announced that if CC's did not reduce charges to £12 by 31st May 2006, the OFT "did not rule out legal action". Later the OFT clarified that the same trigger point applied to banks and mortgage lenders, but the latter laughed at the OFT, who did nothing.

 

About a month ago the OFT let slip, that they agreed with banks that charges levied when overdraft limit was breached (bad cheque honoured) were service fees, not breach of contract penalties, and hence Dunlop-v-Garage refund precedent did not apply.

 

In 12 days time Lloyds - that proactive hawk in the battalion of banks, will RAISE their charges, not lower them. If Lloyds does know something about the position the OFT is preparing for the test case, then this is not an encouraging straw in the wind.

 

The OFT and PenaltyCharges.co.uk jointly proposed a lawful charge pegged at £5. At Christmas 2006 a joint delegation visited the OFT HQ in London. The OFT refused to speak to the delegation, totally locking their front doors.

 

So Opalie, if you have not yet negotiated for interest suspension with TSB card office in Brighton, then sooner the better. After the test case verdict there might not be much refund coming.

 

GL.

[Mistermind]

Opalie, if an account is closed the overdrawn balance remains payable. The difference is no further penalty charges can be levied on a closed account. If it is made plain to the bank that due to age and unemployment there is no point the bank adding on further monthly debit interest then the bank will probably stop the latter, and wait for monthly repaymentd to reduce the closing balance. But if the account holder owns a house then the bank will chase harder. So for practical reasons it may pay to close this account if the parties so wish. Nationwide is not the only fish in the sea. If your sis would derive a feeling of normalisation to have a new account opened elsewhere starting with a clean sheet, then suggest you:

 

click SEARCH on the blue bar near the top, click ADVANCED SEARCH, input keyword PARACHUTE, search THREAD TITLE only, click SEARCH at the bottom --> this would then list numerous threads showing how to proceed.

 

30 years ago bank staff were human beings, respected by the local community for their integrity and understanding. But over the past 20 years staff headcount was cut, and human contact with customers replaced by IT automation. A large branch can hold 50,000 accounts. Anyone who tries to ring the branch now gets put through to impersonal Service Centres, or worse still Indian call centres, who have never heard of the customer.

 

Centralising and dehumanising changes transformed high street retail banks into anonymous wholesale money warehouses. Emphasising the letter rather than the spirit of banking, bankers became unhelpful to customers on whom they rely to deposit the capital which keeps banks afloat. With banker and customer no longer on speaking terms, not surprising that at Northern Rock a small whiff of distrust led to self-fulfilling suspicion, then to the first run on a British bank since the 1830's. Today the chairman of Northern Rock resigned. The brand name has suffered such irreparable damage that it cannot come back under its own name. Let other banks beware.