Bank Charges Refunds

[maffew]

A question:

I recently claimed for about £200 from my bank for charges I had accrued over 5-6 years. They offered me £85 and being very skint at the time and - in desperate need of money at the time - I accepted.

Can I now go back and claim the remaining £115, plus any charges I have accrued since, or is there some loophole which means I am not allowed to do so?

the first letter you probably would have got a "heres your money as a good will" type letter withough admitting liability, and contained a clause saying its final offer blah blah blah. If you try and claim again they'll likely close your account

 

[Nibble]

oh yeah. sorry, what a div. misread it

must stop doing that

Beleive me, I don't understand most of what I say!

 

[Chesney Christ]

the gravy train has well and truly left town on this. Although the judgement was by a District Recorder and therefore not binding on other courts, it is a real step that a judge has accepted the claim that these fees are in respect of services that the bank provides you when you go over an agreed overdraft limit. Those being:

- paying a cheque or direct debit rather than returning it and affecting your credit rating

- allowing you to borrow off them without notice or agreement

- advising you of the situation

- all based on a preadvised and publicly available tariff

when you add all these three things together, then the fees (and there are very few who charge the £39 being bandied around by the press) are not as unreasonable as is being claimed.

I'm sorry, but that is simply false. A programme recently did an investigation on this matter, and a few experts (taking into account absolutely everything you mentioned) calculated what it actually costs the banks to issue these charges. There were 3 of them and the absolute MAXIMUM they thought it could cost was about £3.50.

 

[Chesney Christ]

Right, what you need to

 

[ROSM]

I'm sorry, but that is simply false. A programme recently did an investigation on this matter, and a few experts (taking into account absolutely everything you mentioned) calculated what it actually costs the banks to issue these charges. There were 3 of them and the absolute MAXIMUM they thought it could cost was about £3.50.

I saw that programme and having supplied activity based costing software to the banking industry I can tell you that they were wrong.

The letter production is c£3.50 on it's own

The management of the account when overdrawn is c£2 per day

The decision process on average (bearing in mind some are taken in an automated system) is about £5 - when you think you're average bank clerk has their time costed at £80 per hour that is c5mins work

and finally the cost to you of not having cheques bounced in quite interesting, I would say that a tenner a time to save the embarassment is not far off

that is cost to the bank of a tenner and cost from you for being kind and letting you take their money of a tenner.

but as I said, it's all about loss leading. That's how the rest is made up

 

[Nibble]

The game with banks is getting a bit tougher now, i guess we will all just have to chance our arm and see where we get. hopefully it won't cost us too much if we lose.

 

[maffew]

The letter production is c£3.50 on it's own

well we outsourced a one off mail shot for 2000 + letters today for £150 (+postage) which is about 8p per record, so how they think its £3.50 on an established up and running automated system is puzzling

and finally the cost to you of not having cheques bounced in quite interesting, I would say that a tenner a time to save the embarassment is not far off

that is cost to the bank of a tenner and cost from you for being kind and letting you take their money of a tenner.

so its a fine then?

 

[ROSM]

well we outsourced a one off mail shot for 2000 + letters today for £150 (+postage) which is about 8p per record, so how they think its £3.50 on an established up and running automated system is puzzling




so its a fine then?

because the decision behind the letter production isn't fully automated - once a decision is taken then yes it is. There isn't just one decision process. There's ne for 'you're overdrawn.........' which is the 8p version you refer to whilst the other is what level of letter and can depend on the amount of manual decision making. Then there is a third for we've review the specific item, who the payee is and decided to pay it.

But you say fine - I'd say service. They are after all letting you have money without prior agreement. The cost to you of not being embarrased to your landlord, friends etc needs to be factored in. It's like saying paying more for a 'named' pair of trainers is a fine just because you dont want your mates seeing you in woolworths own.

 

[eastlondonseagull]

and finally the cost to you of not having cheques bounced in quite interesting, I would say that a tenner a time to save the embarassment is not far off

that is cost to the bank of a tenner and cost from you for being kind and letting you take their money of a tenner.

but as I said, it's all about loss leading. That's how the rest is made up

A fairly big chunk of the £800 charges I'm planning to claim back came because cheques WERE bounced.

 

[eastlondonseagull]

But you say fine - I'd say service. They are after all letting you have money without prior agreement. The cost to you of not being embarrased to your landlord, friends etc needs to be factored in. It's like saying paying more for a 'named' pair of trainers is a fine just because you dont want your mates seeing you in woolworths own.

The more they FINE you - and it is a fine - the more financial shit you get into. If it was a 'service' it would do you good, would be of assistance. Instead, they then fine you because their over-inflated charge has made you even more overdrawn. It's ludicrous

 

[e77]

The worst they can do is close your account, so if that doesn't worry you then you only have the price of a stamp and £10 Data Protection Act fee to loose.

My feeling is that the banks are right to charge people who break the terms of their contract with them but £30 is a bit too much.

 

[ROSM]

A fairly big chunk of the £800 charges I'm planning to claim back came because cheques WERE bounced.

bouncing cheques is interesting as this incurs costs at both banks. This is largely still a manual process.

I take your point about charges causing you to go further overdrawn but if the debt is purely charges on charges then banks have software that automatically picks this up not to charge - charges only recur if further debits out take the account od.

I know it sounds unfair and for many banks if they dont publish their charges and give 'the odd chance' i.e. refund for goodwill initially in the early stages - then I can see the need to challenge them, but for those who knowingly kept going od and not asking first and now want their cash back and blaming everybody else, well I have no sympathy

 

[BensGrandad]

[B
-
when you add all these three things together, then the fees (and there are very few who charge the £39 being bandied around by the press) are not as unreasonable as is being claimed.

[/B]

A nephew of mine was charged £39 by Halifax to return a Direct Debit and then £12 by Halifax One Credit Card because it was not paid.

How can the same bank HBOS justify charging differenbt amounts for the same transaction. I can understand both cahrging but why different amounts.


Sorry this has already appearred earlier on.

 

[Napper]

because the decision behind the letter production isn't fully automated - once a decision is taken then yes it is. There isn't just one decision process. There's ne for 'you're overdrawn.........' which is the 8p version you refer to whilst the other is what level of letter and can depend on the amount of manual decision making. Then there is a third for we've review the specific item, who the payee is and decided to pay it.

But you say fine - I'd say service. They are after all letting you have money without prior agreement. The cost to you of not being embarrased to your landlord, friends etc needs to be factored in. It's like saying paying more for a 'named' pair of trainers is a fine just because you dont want your mates seeing you in woolworths own.

Absolutely ridiculous , clearly not informed on this matter , I imagine you have prob run your account perfectly and never had any dealings with charges etc

Now let me tell you when you get made redundant and you need a bit of help from the bank but they turn their back instead insisting on charging £200 a month on charges , YES Charges and the situation starts to spiral, then you will see how they are now unlawful and deservadly being held to task,

I have won a over 3k back so far and have many claims outstanding.

The bank winning that case was an exception and the persons defence was poor as no evidence produced . Wont set a precadent at all.

I'm sure something eventually will give as the banks are powerful but for the foreseeable future the message is claim and keep claiming.

Lets get some back from their billions of profits which they've made unlawfully

 

[Napper]

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/search.html?searchid=9091997

suggest reading forums about it all, game no where near up

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Absolutely ridiculous , clearly not informed on this matter , I imagine you have prob run your account perfectly and never had any dealings with charges etc

Now let me tell you when you get made redundant and you need a bit of help from the bank but they turn their back instead insisting on charging £200 a month on charges , YES Charges and the situation starts to spiral, then you will see how they are now unlawful and deservadly being held to task,

I have won a over 3k back so far and have many claims outstanding.

The bank winning that case was an exception and the persons defence was poor as no evidence produced . Wont set a precadent at all.

I'm sure something eventually will give as the banks are powerful but for the foreseeable future the message is claim and keep claiming.

Lets get some back from their billions of profits which they've made unlawfully

To me the law seems quite clear and simple. Banks are not allowed to make punitive charges when you go overdrawn. That is the law. So it all hinges on whether the £30 they charge covers only their admin and banking costs......and I find it hard to see how a modern bank in the 21st century can rack up costs of £30 sending an automated letter.

 

[Napper]

To me the law seems quite clear and simple. Banks are not allowed to make punitive charges when you go overdrawn. That is the law. So it all hinges on whether the £30 they charge covers only their admin and banking costs......and I find it hard to see how a modern bank in the 21st century can rack up costs of £30 sending an automated letter.

I've had absolutely loads of £75 charges as well.

Thats def not right

 

[desprateseagull]

best to have a separate bank account started, in case thhe bank you are with get a bit arsy.. currently waiting on reply from capital one re their overlimit/late charges..

i think you can give then 8 weeks (more than enough time, surely!) to supply copy statements, then to review/refund excessive charges..

be prepared to take it to county court, but DO have a good case or you may face a counterclaim and even more costs!