Half Pint
Member
Registered: 25th Mar 02
User status: Offline
|
the real problem I have with all of this is that once you've been charged once you know the risks and therefore its your own stupidity which allows the charges to keep happening again and again.
I was wreckless and had overdraft, loans and credits card.... but i've only ever had one charge and never misseed a credit card or loan payment.
if you look at culture today alot of people just simply can't live without... they have to have the latest TV's, iPods, cars, clothes etc etc. and for that they see those are more important than paying bills, rent etc, etc.... meaning they get loans, credits cards, overdrafts purely because their wage can't sustain their lifestyle then moan when they break the rules which are clearly laid out.
Some people learn money management quickly others take longer, and some quiet simply don't care and are wreckless and its those that i have not sympathy.
|
Half Pint
Member
Registered: 25th Mar 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by SVM 286
quote:
Originally posted by strick206
They have ruled in favour of the banks, a shock decision but nothing can be done for the short term now i don't think
Is this US or UK or both?
uk supreme court
|
SVM 286
Member
Registered: 13th Feb 05
Location: pain
User status: Offline
|
Ah, bugger.  That sucks. Heads they win, tails we lose.
Didn't know we had one. Thought it was just the Septics that called it Supreme Court.
Afternoon Tone. 
|
Half Pint
Member
Registered: 25th Mar 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by SVM 286
Ah, bugger. That sucks. Heads they win, tails we lose.
Didn't know we had one. Thought it was just the Septics that called it Supreme Court.
Afternoon Tone.
indeed we do, right behind the houses of wanke.... (oops sorry) Parliament
I took a few weeks of work to do the cctv camera install for my mates company 
Jim
[Edited on 25-11-2009 by Half Pint]
|
SVM 286
Member
Registered: 13th Feb 05
Location: pain
User status: Offline
|
Seven of em in the ladies yeah?
|
Tom
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: Wirral, Merseyside
User status: Offline
|
I think you are missing my point now daimo, snob comments aside (if the word offends you then fine, i'll choose a different word but I still think you come across as a little ignorant with your black and white comments, which is my opinion  ), I agree with what you (all) are saying around people shouldn't be taking the piss, spending money they don't have etc etc that's all valid and fine with me. But those 'frivilous' people are not the only people who will be affected by this ruling.
I don't understand your views towards banks being within there rights to charge what they like because 'people shouldn't get into the situation in the 1st place', when infact you have also said that you think the charges are excessive?? My point being that the situation where charges are applied is not always some tosser knowingly spending more money than he has, it's also people who are struggling to get by and who these massive charges will have a much bigger impact on.
The ruling is horse shit for this very reason, they could have capped charges (or at least made them relevent to the amount in question) and they didn't, hence they are wrong imo.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
TBH it doesnt effect me either way (think it happened to me a bit but wouldnt have a huge amount to claim back), but at the same time I can see the charges are excessive.
The fact is, by law the banks are not allowed to make penalty charges, so by charging you more than the cost when you go overdrawn they are doing something illegal. Simply because of this law the payments should be repayed to those who were charged them.
Now if in future the law is abolished and they want to charge £30, or £300 then do so, and the consumer would have to accept this as its all legal.
|
Half Pint
Member
Registered: 25th Mar 02
User status: Offline
|
i think the blunt fact is that rulling against the banks would have had a larger impact on the economy as banks would search other avenues to recover the money paid out and get their profits back on side...
end of free banking, you have to pay for your account
charging for withdrawing you cash
small / non existant overdrafts
The list goes no and on....
I agree that the blanket apporach to charges is not right and that they are excessive which is why they should bring back bank managers who can make that decision and decide on your finances rather than a computer and credit score.
christ i was always going to end badly with the banks recognising family credit and other such support / supplement payments as a regular income to approve loans. overdrafts and credit cards.....
|
Baskey
Member
Registered: 31st May 06
User status: Offline
|
I paid out loads in charges over the years. I knew i would get charged and i still did it.
Also banks make money from charges. It was calculated that if the banks were not making money from them, the average person would be paying £10 a month for privalige of a bank account
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
My little say on it is, I'm disappointed, but not suprised. I've paid probably thousands in charges through the years, and didn't even bother trying to claim them back, I was in the wrong, and I know that, so annoying as it is, or was, I accepted that fact. (saying that If the public did win this case I would of been filing a claim for monies)
I do think they should of capped charges, I believe it's all done on computer anyway, so how does it incur a £35 admin fee when you're 70p in the red on your account? (If that's been answered then fair enough, didn't read the whole thread)
The annoying times are when you genuinely lose track of cash, you pay for something, assume that it's gone from your account as it was a card transaction, then withdraw money 3 days later, another couple of days and the money clears and you're in the red and getting bummed for £35 a time, if a DD bounces, another £28, you end up paying £60odd for a mistake.
It mainly affects the people who are struggling to get by, and students etc... and keeps them without money as they're in a constant vicious circle making money, just to pay it to banks.
And I do like my free bank account, and yeah, the banks would of had to find an alternate source of income if they did lose this method. So is unfortunately the right result imo. Did hear talk of them possibly charging at Cash points again soon tho?
[Edited on 25-11-2009 by Cavey]
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tom
I don't understand your views towards banks being within there rights to charge what they like because 'people shouldn't get into the situation in the 1st place', when infact you have also said that you think the charges are excessive?? My point being that the situation where charges are applied is not always some tosser knowingly spending more money than he has, it's also people who are struggling to get by and who these massive charges will have a much bigger impact on.
Now read what you've jsut written yourself.
The bank is a company. There is no law as to WHAT they can charge for going over your OD limit. This is why they can do it.
I've said I disagree with the excessive charges for such small peaks over your OD limit, but at the end of the day, as the banks CAN charge what they want.
Im sorry but those struggling to get by will have things they can give up if life was really THAT bad. Got a computer console? Well if life was REALLY that bad, you would sell it to ensure you don't go into your OD limit hence not encouring charges.
Sure people might not want to give up luxery items, but you can't have it both ways. Something has to give, and it won't be the banks. That just leaves the person.
Thats how it is, people can complain all they want, but the courts are now in favour of the banks so no amount of debating or arguing will change that at the moment.
|
Tom
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: Wirral, Merseyside
User status: Offline
|
Can't be hooped writing any more. I disagree with the ruling, you don't. End of conversation.
|
Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
I agree with Tom. IT's not always that black and white. I'm good with my money but there have been points where I was on the bread line as it were, one time my dentist direct debit messed up and for some reason I received 2 charges when I was expecting 1 which made me overdrawn. I got it rectified as it was my first one ever. But the point is that charge could have then spirralled to a lot more with it being so hefty and a different situation. (you do get multiple charges if multipy transactions bounce) that is not helping anyone.
At the same time those that were utter wank with their money but spawnily dropped on claiming the fees back I do not agree with. The problem has always been the excessive charges and not the fact a charge exsisted.
|
All Torque
Member
Registered: 17th Nov 05
Location: Milton Keynes Drives: Ford Focus TDCi
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
I don't see the issue tbh.
OD is not your money anyway, its a short loan from the bank, an agreed amount you can go into.
If you go over that agreed amount, expect to be charged.
Theres nothing to stop anyone calling the bank, explaining the situation (bill about to come out etc) and them providing a short term extension on your overdraft. If they don't, threaten to leave the bank for a rival.
I'd rather them punish those spending money that isn't theres, than punish all us innocent folk with stupid cash machine charges.
Maybe this will remind some people that when your £450 into your £500 overdraft, you cannot still go out and buy that £200 jacket, or fill your car up with £60 worth of fuel. Maybe it will teach people to manage their money better so everyone isn't in huge amounts of debt..
Or am I missing something here? It just seems like simple common sense to me?
[Edited on 25-11-2009 by VXR]
I completely agree 
|
Pete_vxl
Member
Registered: 24th Nov 06
Location: Lochgelly, Fife
User status: Offline
|
I 100% agree with daimo. I work for a bank and deal with this shit day in day out. Yes you get people who go over once in a blue moon and the charge will normally get taken off but there are people who just dont care and will use their card fully knowing they have no money.
One occasio. Was a guy going mental coz he was charged for buying summin off of playstation network, he chatted some BS about financial difficulty,even though he had a ps3 i assume for psn and a direct debit going to sky for over 50 quid. People need to wake up get their prioritys right.
[Edited on 25-11-2009 by Pete_vxl]
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by All Torque
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
I don't see the issue tbh.
OD is not your money anyway, its a short loan from the bank, an agreed amount you can go into.
If you go over that agreed amount, expect to be charged.
Theres nothing to stop anyone calling the bank, explaining the situation (bill about to come out etc) and them providing a short term extension on your overdraft. If they don't, threaten to leave the bank for a rival.
I'd rather them punish those spending money that isn't theres, than punish all us innocent folk with stupid cash machine charges.
Maybe this will remind some people that when your £450 into your £500 overdraft, you cannot still go out and buy that £200 jacket, or fill your car up with £60 worth of fuel. Maybe it will teach people to manage their money better so everyone isn't in huge amounts of debt..
Or am I missing something here? It just seems like simple common sense to me?
[Edited on 25-11-2009 by VXR]
I completely agree
You're missing a lot Daimo. Do you think it's THAT easy to phone your bank and get an overdraft put on? It's not as black and white as you're making out. Yes, most of the time it's down to folk spending money they don't have. But other times it's down to unforeseeable circumstances.
|
Pete_vxl
Member
Registered: 24th Nov 06
Location: Lochgelly, Fife
User status: Offline
|
Just re-reading a bit and if your bank wont put youre overdraft up and you threaten to leave they will not increase youre overdraft, your speaking to a bank, not sky etc. Its an underwroters decision not the person you speak to on the phone or at the branch.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eck
You're missing a lot Daimo. Do you think it's THAT easy to phone your bank and get an overdraft put on? It's not as black and white as you're making out. Yes, most of the time it's down to folk spending money they don't have. But other times it's down to unforeseeable circumstances.
Yup its easy. At worst you need to make a trip to sign the new agreement. Done it before.
Un-forseeable circumstances can be explained and if they are valid the charges are usually dropped.
|
DaveyLC
Member
Registered: 8th Oct 08
Location: Berkshire
User status: Offline
|
This is a subject that really PISSES me off.. I cant see how people can sit there and complain about getting charged for going over-drawn..
Theres a simple solution: DONT FUCKING SPEND MONEY YOU HAVENT GOT.
People get an organised over-draft facility which is supposed to be used in an emergcy my definition of an emergency for example would be a self-employed person who needs to buy materials to complete and a job to get paid not to go out and buy new pair of shoes, SkyTV and a 42" plasma screen.
We live in a society with very few consequences, people want things now, things they cant afford but they dont want to pay for it.
People need to stop being so fucking greedy.. I know someone who moans about having no money and they are forever living in a £2k over-draft but they always have new phones, new clothes and they've got a fucking water-cooler in their house... thats right a water-cooler like you get in an office! Which they pay a monthly rental for PLUS £10 a bottle..
People used to be ashamed of debt, these days its encouraged, yeah the banks should have been more responsible but the blame is to be shared by society and the banks 50:50.
[Edited on 26-11-2009 by DaveyLC]
|
