howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
24 November 2009
18:4433811#1
according to media reports, anyone using a cashpoint in future will be stuffed to the tune of £.2.50 per transaction.
this appears to be because the courts intend to stop banks "overcharging" for unauthorise overdrafts.
i never though i would say this but i sympathise with the banks here, anyone spending someone else's money without asking them deserves to get shafted.
to obtain money from a cashoint means that you must have money in your account in the first place, which then means you are playing by the rules.
the way i look at it, is that the new proposals mean that reponsible individuals will finance irresponsible ones.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
24 November 2009
18:4933814#2
Does that include cashback at supermarkets as well Howard?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
24 November 2009
18:5433815#3
no colin, that will remain unchanged, how long for though?
the supermarkets will be inundated, so will have to charge a fee.
Guest 656- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,262
24 November 2009
19:4333827#4
Oh no! another way to get more money from us, and so cheeky, so now we have to pay to get our own money out, what next? The one that really takes the biscuit is BT charging us to pay our phone bill to them by cheque
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
24 November 2009
19:4833828#5
Worse than that ColetteB was Virgin charging me £5 a month for not paying by direct debit, even though I always paid the bill as soon as I got it. They got their money quicker my way, but made no difference. Why should you be penalised for the way you pay it?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 668- Registered: 13 Apr 2008
- Posts: 91
24 November 2009
20:4033834#6
Shafted? For missing a payment by one day, or going £1 over a limit?? These kind of errors are being charged at £25 a pop, how is that fair?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
24 November 2009
20:4333835#7
more fair than someone that keeps their finances straight being charged £.2. 50. for a cash withdrawal.
Guest 668- Registered: 13 Apr 2008
- Posts: 91
24 November 2009
21:0733837#8
If they hadn't amassed such a large amount in the first place by charging these fees, they wouldn't be missing it now they've been asked to pay the minority of them back. Blame the greedy banks for creating their bloated bottom lines.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
24 November 2009
23:1533845#9
All the banks have done is raise the possibility that they may have to charge for what are now offered as free services if their income from charges for bouncing cheques, over limit letters etc. is cut following the forthcoming court action.
The most likely outcome is that banks will offer a range of accounts some of which will include transaction charges, some will require an annual account fee in return for no charges etc. What absolutely will happen is a huge shake up of current account banking and a massive amount of competition and customer churn, which is no bad thing.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
24 November 2009
23:3933846#10
Not too sure how this will work? For instance when I use an ATM it will only allow me to draw from my available balance.If I have £50 as an available balance and therefore withdraw that cash and then the bank charges me £2.50 for the privilege that surely would put me into an overdrawn situation and result in further bank charges.Or will the ATM advise me that my available balance is £47 after incorporating the £2.50 service fee?
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
25 November 2009
07:5733848#11
Banks suck. If I had my time again I would stuff my salary into the mattress.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
25 November 2009
18:0933879#12
the high court found in favor of the banks.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
25 November 2009
18:3833884#13
good news all round brian.
i wonder what the banks that we(the public) own would have done, if the verdict had been different?
25 November 2009
20:1333895#14
Sucked us dry. No changes rthere.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
26 November 2009
00:0133905#15
Probably not Bern as an example RBS reduced their over limit and bounced cheque charges significantly appox 1 month ago. I suspect that Lloyds will follow suit in the next month or so as will other banks.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
26 November 2009
08:0433912#16
However it is dressed up and moved around, the result will be the same: us sucked dry.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
26 November 2009
10:3633927#17
not if we keep in the black bern, as things stand free banking will continue.
that is not to say it will last for ever.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
26 November 2009
20:2933948#18
I agree Howard.
Yes the charges do seem to be excessive, though legal and there is clearly a need for much greater transparency and clarity about the scale and scope of charges. I suspect that as a result of the bad PR and continuing consumer pressure we will see banks reduce charge levels, clarify their documentation etc.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
26 November 2009
20:5633951#19
I'm not a fan of the banks; the ordinary people at branch level are fine, but it's those in the City who can afford to look down with contempt on the ordinary working people that get up my nose. I shall be waiting to see the response if and when the banks are forced to disclose just how many earn £1m+.....my guess is that the reason this hasn't been voluntarily disclosed is that many would be outraged at the numbers involved.
True friends stab you in the front.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
26 November 2009
22:4033958#20
It is estimated over 1,000 bank employees in the City earn over £1m per annum
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi