Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Bank Charges
last reply
89 replies
5.1k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Sex God
A major, D day for this today.
Banks IMO need to be fair.
Banks IMO need to be fair.
If you were faced with a possible "loss" of several billions if you lost a case, and possibly not losing it if you appealed ?
Whatever happens banks are going to be charging for a lot more in the near future.
Favourite newbies:
ATM charges
Increased/new charges for overdrafts.
But it is what they get when they turn-out to have been crooks for decades.
My partner just received a letter from her insurance company (car) informing her that the FSA had told them they had to tell her that they MAY, POSSIBLY have been selling her inappropriate and useless PPI for years ( told her that myself....years ago) and that she MAY, POSSIBLY have a claim against them. (if found, they pay the LOT back plus 8% interest for the term of the PPI)
MY bank told me that if I claimed they would close my account !
Whatever happens banks are going to be charging for a lot more in the near future.
Favourite newbies:
ATM charges
Increased/new charges for overdrafts.
But it is what they get when they turn-out to have been crooks for decades.
My partner just received a letter from her insurance company (car) informing her that the FSA had told them they had to tell her that they MAY, POSSIBLY have been selling her inappropriate and useless PPI for years ( told her that myself....years ago) and that she MAY, POSSIBLY have a claim against them. (if found, they pay the LOT back plus 8% interest for the term of the PPI)
MY bank told me that if I claimed they would close my account !
Sex God
Trouble is they will no doubt use the money given to them by the tax payer to refund the tax payer then get another hand out from the Goverment (via the taxpayer) to keep them going :lol2:
:? 
Sex God
I was surprised the decision went the way of the banks... but they are saying that it was more of a point not on whether the charges were fair, but on whether the charges were part of the core service.....
its not over yet...... the OFT may go down other avenues......
its not over yet...... the OFT may go down other avenues......
The charges are NOT fair at all.
Three years ago I got charged the usual fees for going a tad over my overdraft. I disputed it with the bank ( LLoyds btw ). I refused to pay the additional charges as the over draft was for a measly £35, and was for three days.
Subsequently after months of wrangling those charges escalated to £640. All this for a Direct debit for 35 quid. I was one of those that was hoping to have those charges refunded, but I KNOW the banks can and have done exactky what they wanted too. They have conned and stole from millions of customers, and then used their money to fund dodgy loans, and third world countries which they had no chance of ever getting the money back.
I was praying that LLoyds would go under, or at least one of the other major bankls, to teach all those greedy fuckers a lesson but....they steal our money, they con us, they charge fees that are out of all proportion, and then when they have been so irresponsible that they lose billions of pounds, the Government step in with more of OUR money and bail them out.
All we have in this country now is financial institutions to keep this country afloat, everything else major has gone.
The banks are greedy...manipulative....crooks, who deserve everything they SHOULD have got, but once again they have got away with it at the expense of all of us who pay or have paid tax of any sort. Would any of us get that help?
I still have LLoyds hounding me for those charges, and I just say " take it out of MY stake in your company ". This ruling will cost me dear...all for a poxy 35 quid. Fees? They can stick them up their greedy arses!!!
Three years ago I got charged the usual fees for going a tad over my overdraft. I disputed it with the bank ( LLoyds btw ). I refused to pay the additional charges as the over draft was for a measly £35, and was for three days.
Subsequently after months of wrangling those charges escalated to £640. All this for a Direct debit for 35 quid. I was one of those that was hoping to have those charges refunded, but I KNOW the banks can and have done exactky what they wanted too. They have conned and stole from millions of customers, and then used their money to fund dodgy loans, and third world countries which they had no chance of ever getting the money back.
I was praying that LLoyds would go under, or at least one of the other major bankls, to teach all those greedy fuckers a lesson but....they steal our money, they con us, they charge fees that are out of all proportion, and then when they have been so irresponsible that they lose billions of pounds, the Government step in with more of OUR money and bail them out.
All we have in this country now is financial institutions to keep this country afloat, everything else major has gone.
The banks are greedy...manipulative....crooks, who deserve everything they SHOULD have got, but once again they have got away with it at the expense of all of us who pay or have paid tax of any sort. Would any of us get that help?
I still have LLoyds hounding me for those charges, and I just say " take it out of MY stake in your company ". This ruling will cost me dear...all for a poxy 35 quid. Fees? They can stick them up their greedy arses!!!
Sexpert
Despite 2 earlier rulings ffs!
I know there's an argument that says "you signed up for the T's&C's" but these charges are typically disproportionate, punitive and downright profiteering. There should be legislated maximum charges for the common things like reminder letters, exceeding overdraft by up to £x amount for £y days etc. Then Banks can set out their scale of charges and penalties and customers can vote with their feet.
I know there's an argument that says "you signed up for the T's&C's" but these charges are typically disproportionate, punitive and downright profiteering. There should be legislated maximum charges for the common things like reminder letters, exceeding overdraft by up to £x amount for £y days etc. Then Banks can set out their scale of charges and penalties and customers can vote with their feet.
Quote by easyrider_xxx
Despite 2 earlier rulings ffs!
I know there's an argument that says "you signed up for the T's&C's" but these charges are typically disproportionate, punitive and downright profiteering. There should be legislated maximum charges for the common things like reminder letters, exceeding overdraft by up to £x amount for £y days etc. Then Banks can set out their scale of charges and penalties and customers can vote with their feet.
There are some who have done that now - in return for not paying any interest on funds you hold with them in your current account :shock:
I firmly believe that when the names for jobs was being allocated, they started at the wrong end for bankers...
Oh there are ways around banks if you are lucky. I set up a child saving account in 2005 and its taken me until a month ago to get the bank to change account so that no tax is paid. About every 3 months I would go in to the bank get the woman to send off the relevant tax form to their head office and it would get lost in the internal post. Every time this happened I would complain about this and every time they have credited £50 to my daughters account as I told them I have to keep getting taxis into town to fill out a new form and just how inconvient its been for me. So far I've done that 15 times times that by £50 = £750. Shame now that they have actually changed the account as it was turning into a nice little nest egg for my daughter when shes older.
did anyone really think the banks would have to repay fees to the public.
they have had our money from the government to keep them afloat so does anyone think they would then repay billions of pounds?
they would only go back to the goverment for more money. yours and my money.
of course they were going to win.
they have had our money from the government to keep them afloat so does anyone think they would then repay billions of pounds?
they would only go back to the goverment for more money. yours and my money.
of course they were going to win.
Quote by kentswingers777
The charges are NOT fair at all.
Three years ago I got charged the usual fees for going a tad over my overdraft. I disputed it with the bank ( LLoyds btw ). I refused to pay the additional charges as the over draft was for a measly £35, and was for three days.
Subsequently after months of wrangling those charges escalated to £640. All this for a Direct debit for 35 quid. I was one of those that was hoping to have those charges refunded, but I KNOW the banks can and have done exactky what they wanted too. They have conned and stole from millions of customers, and then used their money to fund dodgy loans, and third world countries which they had no chance of ever getting the money back.
I was praying that LLoyds would go under, or at least one of the other major bankls, to teach all those greedy fuckers a lesson but....they steal our money, they con us, they charge fees that are out of all proportion, and then when they have been so irresponsible that they lose billions of pounds, the Government step in with more of OUR money and bail them out.
All we have in this country now is financial institutions to keep this country afloat, everything else major has gone.
The banks are greedy...manipulative....crooks, who deserve everything they SHOULD have got, but once again they have got away with it at the expense of all of us who pay or have paid tax of any sort. Would any of us get that help? kenty, god help you, you are moving toward MY way of thinking. next you will be blaming them greedy fuckers that own ALL our politicians and media for putting out the fraudulent claims about imigration, asylum seekers and foriegners causing unemployment. your heading in the right direction to cite them rich bastards on billions in welfare as opposed tp the poor on welfare. excellent kenty. i said you was a thinker.
I still have LLoyds hounding me for those charges, and I just say " take it out of MY stake in your company ". This ruling will cost me dear...all for a poxy 35 quid. Fees? They can stick them up their greedy arses!!!
Sex God
The case wasn't about whether the charges are fair.
Honestly it wasn't at all.
It was about whether the OFT are allowed to make judgements about the charges.
The basis of that call is that the OFT can only judge on activities that are part of the Core Business activities of the company.
The Judge (I don't know if it was just one or a bench full) decided that charges for unapproved overdrafts does NOT form part of the core business.
It was NEVER going to decide that people who feel they have been overcharged can make claims.
It might have opened the way for the OFT to decide that some charges were unreasonable. Thus opening the way for customers to make claims for unfair charging.
The Judge decided against the OFT's position. He also left the OFT open to make a further attempt to tackle charges using other legal directions.
So PLEASE can we stop going on about how the Banks won the right to keep overcharging - they weren't going to lose that right in this court case. They would have appealed, probably for years, and those people paying high charges would still be paying them.
I agree, btw, that most of the charges are unfair. If they don't want to let you have the money - they can put you on a non-overdraft account. So they are totally complicit in people going over their limits. Just like door-step loan sharks.
I'm in the lucky position of being able to keep my head just about above water, so I would have suffered if the charges had been cut - my charges for running an in-credit account (does 0 cound as positive? LOL) would have gone through the roof.
Honestly it wasn't at all.
It was about whether the OFT are allowed to make judgements about the charges.
The basis of that call is that the OFT can only judge on activities that are part of the Core Business activities of the company.
The Judge (I don't know if it was just one or a bench full) decided that charges for unapproved overdrafts does NOT form part of the core business.
It was NEVER going to decide that people who feel they have been overcharged can make claims.
It might have opened the way for the OFT to decide that some charges were unreasonable. Thus opening the way for customers to make claims for unfair charging.
The Judge decided against the OFT's position. He also left the OFT open to make a further attempt to tackle charges using other legal directions.
So PLEASE can we stop going on about how the Banks won the right to keep overcharging - they weren't going to lose that right in this court case. They would have appealed, probably for years, and those people paying high charges would still be paying them.
I agree, btw, that most of the charges are unfair. If they don't want to let you have the money - they can put you on a non-overdraft account. So they are totally complicit in people going over their limits. Just like door-step loan sharks.
I'm in the lucky position of being able to keep my head just about above water, so I would have suffered if the charges had been cut - my charges for running an in-credit account (does 0 cound as positive? LOL) would have gone through the roof.
Quote by flower411
The case wasn't about whether the charges are fair.
Honestly it wasn't at all.
It was about whether the OFT are allowed to make judgements about the charges.
The basis of that call is that the OFT can only judge on activities that are part of the Core Business activities of the company.
The Judge (I don't know if it was just one or a bench full) decided that charges for unapproved overdrafts does NOT form part of the core business.
It was NEVER going to decide that people who feel they have been overcharged can make claims.
It might have opened the way for the OFT to decide that some charges were unreasonable. Thus opening the way for customers to make claims for unfair charging.
The Judge decided against the OFT's position. He also left the OFT open to make a further attempt to tackle charges using other legal directions.
So PLEASE can we stop going on about how the Banks won the right to keep overcharging - they weren't going to lose that right in this court case. They would have appealed, probably for years, and those people paying high charges would still be paying them.
I agree, btw, that most of the charges are unfair. If they don't want to let you have the money - they can put you on a non-overdraft account. So they are totally complicit in people going over their limits. Just like door-step loan sharks.
I'm in the lucky position of being able to keep my head just about above water, so I would have suffered if the charges had been cut - my charges for running an in-credit account (does 0 cound as positive? LOL) would have gone through the roof.
Thank you ....
I`ve been trying to put most of this into words all day !!!
Personally ...I`m still in a war of nerves with more than one bank and a whole herd of credit card companies ....
I was lucky enough to take full advantage of the banks lending lunacy and purchased my current home with a "self certified" mortgage !!!
For those that never managed to get on this particular bandwagon .....self certification is a euphamism for "fuckin lie through ya teeth cos the greedy motherfuckers don`t give a shit whether you can pay it back cos the current trend means that property will increase in value by 50% every six months and they`ll reposess the second you default " ...
But
Banks and lenders ain`t flavour of the month right now ....and ....oh yes there`s an and !!
Nobody wants a mouthy ....I`m a father after justice ....talking and shouting ...
So ...I`m still hanging in here ...
It`s all gettin a bit dodgy now ....but what the hell ....I`ve only gotta last a couple more years and they haven`t even started court proceedings yet :lol:
Are you saying that it's OK to borrow money you know you can't repay just because the banks are willing to lend it to you? I'm certainly not going to defend the irresponsible lending of the banks but what about personal responsibility, or doesn't that come into the equation?
Quote by gulsonroad30664
The charges are NOT fair at all.
Three years ago I got charged the usual fees for going a tad over my overdraft. I disputed it with the bank ( LLoyds btw ). I refused to pay the additional charges as the over draft was for a measly £35, and was for three days.
Subsequently after months of wrangling those charges escalated to £640. All this for a Direct debit for 35 quid. I was one of those that was hoping to have those charges refunded, but I KNOW the banks can and have done exactky what they wanted too. They have conned and stole from millions of customers, and then used their money to fund dodgy loans, and third world countries which they had no chance of ever getting the money back.
I was praying that LLoyds would go under, or at least one of the other major bankls, to teach all those greedy fuckers a lesson but....they steal our money, they con us, they charge fees that are out of all proportion, and then when they have been so irresponsible that they lose billions of pounds, the Government step in with more of OUR money and bail them out.
All we have in this country now is financial institutions to keep this country afloat, everything else major has gone.
The banks are greedy...manipulative....crooks, who deserve everything they SHOULD have got, but once again they have got away with it at the expense of all of us who pay or have paid tax of any sort. Would any of us get that help? kenty, god help you, you are moving toward MY way of thinking. next you will be blaming them greedy fuckers that own ALL our politicians and media for putting out the fraudulent claims about imigration, asylum seekers and foriegners causing unemployment. your heading in the right direction to cite them rich bastards on billions in welfare as opposed tp the poor on welfare. excellent kenty. i said you was a thinker.
I still have LLoyds hounding me for those charges, and I just say " take it out of MY stake in your company ". This ruling will cost me dear...all for a poxy 35 quid. Fees? They can stick them up their greedy arses!!!
Unlike you Gulson not to have anything to say?
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
Unlike you Gulson not to have anything to say?
He did have a conspiracy theory but when he looked it was gone.....
Perhaps it was stolen to stop it being made public
Perhaps its a conspiracy to hide the conspiracy :giggle:
Quote by Steve
Unlike you Gulson not to have anything to say?
He did have a conspiracy theory but when he looked it was gone.....
Perhaps it was stolen to stop it being made public
Perhaps its a conspiracy to hide the conspiracy :giggle:
Yeah he does like a conspiracy....I reckon he knows GNV ya know!
Sex God
Quote by cplintheNE
there is a simple answer to all this DON'T go overdrawn lol
cplin
Obviously that isn't always possible. E|specially when something happens suddenly - illness, death, redundancy, new baby etc etc etc.
But people can help themselves of course. Such as - - - -
Before a change in circumstances strikes - have a plan of what can go, what can be reduced, know which debts HAVE to be repaid, which ones can be deffered and which ones can hang on.
If the change happens - cut back immediately (don't wait for money to run out), talk to creditors about rearranging payments if possible, sell stuff (no NOT granny!), spend some of the redundancy getting the house into a more saleable shape (if that's possible). There is loads of advice out there - the best bit I came across was "pay the debts that will otherewise make you homeless (mortgage is an obvious one, but not the only one), then pay the ones that will result in CCJs and ignore the rest until you can deal with them". This would be after swapping the car for a smaller one/scooter/bike and other sensible changes.
I don't think we can judge someone who ends up in the more and say "tough you brought it on yorself". Of course, in some cases they have. But in many cases they are hit by changes they can't do much about.
I am stuck in a house I can't sell, with a 2 year fixed rate mortgage I can't change and there is a risk my job may be transferred to a different comapnay (without my permission) with a much higher risk of subsequent redundancy but with no years service to give me a reasonable redundnacy package. I would be, to use a technical term, screwed. What am I doing about it? Keeping my car (no debt on that) even though it's really too samll for all of us, paying all my debts as fast as I can (shame I have to increase them to pay son's Uni accomodation cos Student Finance are crap), not splashing out. But I could still end up badly in debt. Would it be my 'fault'? Hard to say. I suppose I could have told my son to drop out of uni, I could let the mortgage people have the house and try to survive on the small equity in it, but the house is my pension - the work one won't keep me.
True John.
I do not mind additional charges for going overdrawn...that is fair enough but....it is the AMMOUNT of charges that is the issue.
How can they get away with 35 quid charges and then 15 quid per DAY until it is repaid?
The smug ones who say " don't go overdrawn then"..I hope that you never find yourself going overdrawn by a few quid, and then in a blink of an eye, have charges easily beyond 100 quid.
They charge you 35 quid charges and then 25 quid to write to you to tell you are overdrawn.
It is a rip off and it pisses me off that the banks have been bailed out with OUR money.
They are worse than the greedy money grabbing scum bags, that are our politicians.
I just wish Lloyds would have been allowed, like any other business would have done, and gone under!
They are still even now at it, with their big fat bonuses. Greedy shits!!!
I do not mind additional charges for going overdrawn...that is fair enough but....it is the AMMOUNT of charges that is the issue.
How can they get away with 35 quid charges and then 15 quid per DAY until it is repaid?
The smug ones who say " don't go overdrawn then"..I hope that you never find yourself going overdrawn by a few quid, and then in a blink of an eye, have charges easily beyond 100 quid.
They charge you 35 quid charges and then 25 quid to write to you to tell you are overdrawn.
It is a rip off and it pisses me off that the banks have been bailed out with OUR money.
They are worse than the greedy money grabbing scum bags, that are our politicians.
I just wish Lloyds would have been allowed, like any other business would have done, and gone under!
They are still even now at it, with their big fat bonuses. Greedy shits!!!
Quote by kentswingers777
True John.
I do not mind additional charges for going overdrawn...that is fair enough but....it is the AMMOUNT of charges that is the issue.
How can they get away with 35 quid charges and then 15 quid per DAY until it is repaid?
The smug ones who say " don't go overdrawn then"..I hope that you never find yourself going overdrawn by a few quid, and then in a blink of an eye, have charges easily beyond 100 quid.
They charge you 35 quid charges and then 25 quid to write to you to tell you are overdrawn.
It is a rip off and it pisses me off that the banks have been bailed out with OUR money.
They are worse than the greedy money grabbing scum bags, that are our politicians.
I just wish Lloyds would have been allowed, like any other business would have done, and gone under!
They are still even now at it, with their big fat bonuses. Greedy shits!!!
I take it you don't bank with LLoyds then Kent, so presumably your money would have been safe had LLoyds been allowed to fail? What do you think the consequences of major banks failing would have been?
Most of Lloyds problems stem from their merger with HBOS, which was "encouraged" by the government. RBS was in a much worse financial condition than LLoyds.
Quote by kentswingers777
I just wish Lloyds would have been allowed, like any other business would have done, and gone under!
They are still even now at it, with their big fat bonuses. Greedy shits!!!
Lloyds banking group has 30 million retail customers, letting them go under was never an option.
The majority of Lloyds bonuses (120 million) are paid out to counter staff on £17K a year or less.
Sexpert
Quote by Phuckers
What happens to people who had their bank charges repaid before this case went to court?!
As I understand it, all the settlements so far have been out of court "goodwill gestures" from the Banks.
So the simple answer is they keep their refunds.
Quote by flower411
I just wish Lloyds would have been allowed, like any other business would have done, and gone under!
They are still even now at it, with their big fat bonuses. Greedy shits!!!
Lloyds banking group has 30 million retail customers, letting them go under was never an option.
The majority of Lloyds bonuses (120 million) are paid out to counter staff on £17K a year or less.
Why was it never an option to let them go under ?
We allow millions of people to die of starvation in the world and we can send armies to kill those that might survive ...
But if there`s a possibility that we won`t be able to pay bonuses to bank staff or ....heaven forbid .....we won`t be able to get a big fat juicy loan to by a fancy telly ....
All of a sudden it`s not an option because of the consequences !!!
Wake up ! We`re all being screwed ....take what ya can and run ...it can`t possibly last !!
So what would have happened to the savings of all the Lloyds customers or the companies that bank with them? The domino effect of all of Lloyds corporate customers going bust would have been catastrophic!
