Are Banks Exploiting Customers Through Overdraft Charges?

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Well this is the third time I've been ripped off by banks in the last 8 years.

1st time I went overdrawn by £1 so they charged me £30, because it was a roll over charging period ie one charging period went into another they charged me £60. At the time I was unemployed, so eventually I ended up with about £300 in charges, it was at this point I left my bank refusing to pay any but the first two original charges. Joined a new bank, after getting a new job I got a £300 pound overdraft, got a job reduced the overdraft to £50 as didn't need it. Then went to increase it to £150 again so I could pay for some medication (not available on NHS) they said can't, I said why I'm earning net 8 times that net? I got a a £300 overdraft why not this one, anyway long story short I had to have the medication ended up with £500 in charges, left that bank rejoined my old bank.

They charged interest recently and put me into the red by a £1 or so, and then have proceeded to charge me £200 again for charges. I am unemployed again so can't pay the charges?

Does anyone else just feel that banks/ banking executives are the lowest form of life on the planet, just under primordial slime? Or is it just me? Apparently if you're not rich they exploit you, if you are they let you get away with murder? Is this customer service, or just exploitation?

Any advice would be nice? What can I do? I'm screwed...

 

[ShawnD]

Why are you going into overdraft? Why do you keep losing your job?

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Why are you going into overdraft? Why do you keep losing your job?

Illness. Or being laid off.

In this country practically everyone has an overdraft facility. We're a nation of debtors. Apparently that makes us a target as well if we have the misfortune to have fallen on hard times, for whatever reason. Thus banks. Apparently they reckon that charging a flat rate of £30 pounds for going overdrawn whatever the reason counts as a reasonable charge in this country, everyone else begs to differ. Thus several rather public legal cases atm. Should the banks win, then the case will go before the EU courts. Which is no consolation for someone who has just incurred £200 pounds of charges through the most weakest reason of being £1 overdrawn.

I have two options, leave my bank refuse to pay and go to court, or incur more than £300 in charges and just lump it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well this is the third time I've been ripped off by banks in the last 8 years.

1st time I went overdrawn by £1 so they charged me £30, because it was a roll over charging period ie one charging period went into another they charged me £60. At the time I was unemployed, so eventually I ended up with about £300 in charges, it was at this point I left my bank refusing to pay any but the first two original charges. Joined a new bank, after getting a new job I got a £300 pound overdraft, got a job reduced the overdraft to £50 as didn't need it. Then went to increase it to £150 again so I could pay for some medication (not available on NHS) they said can't, I said why I'm earning net 8 times that net? I got a a £300 overdraft why not this one, anyway long story short I had to have the medication ended up with £500 in charges, left that bank rejoined my old bank.

They charged interest recently and put me into the red by a £1 or so, and then have proceeded to charge me £200 again for charges. I am unemployed again so can't pay the charges?

Does anyone else just feel that banks/ banking executives are the lowest form of life on the planet, just under primordial slime? Or is it just me? Apparently if you're not rich they exploit you, if you are they let you get away with murder? Is this customer service, or just exploitation?

Any advice would be nice? What can I do? I'm screwed...

You might try going to your bank and talking with them. You may even find them to be reasonable if you give them a chance [not saying they will be but it happens].

 

[BobG]

Illness. Or being laid off.

In this country practically everyone has an overdraft facility. We're a nation of debtors. Apparently that makes us a target as well if we have the misfortune to have fallen on hard times, for whatever reason. Thus banks. Apparently they reckon that charging a flat rate of £30 pounds for going overdrawn whatever the reason counts as a reasonable charge in this country, everyone else begs to differ. Thus several rather public legal cases atm. Should the banks win, then the case will go before the EU courts. Which is no consolation for someone who has just incurred £200 pounds of charges through the most weakest reason of being £1 overdrawn.

I have two options, leave my bank refuse to pay and go to court, or incur more than £300 in charges and just lump it.

Why don't you ask the overdraft fees before opening an account and open an account at the bank with the lowest overdraft fees?

Actually, I don't do this and I doubt even 0.1% of bank customers do this. No one asks about bank fees like that because they'd be afraid the bank would ask them how many checks they plan to bounce. Then the customer would have to respond, "Why, none of course! I'm just hoping you charge especially high fees for bounced checks so I can feel comfortable knowing I don't share the same bank as common riffraff!"

 

[turbo]

Banks are in the business of legalized theft. I have had an IRA with one bank for over 10 years, in the form of a Certificate of Deposit. When it was time to renew, the interest rate was so low that I would have been losing money, after factoring the devaluation of the dollar, so I told them I wanted to roll that money over to a self-directed IRA at another institution, and wanted the money in the form of a check to that other institution. The woman at the service counter printed out the check at her workstation, gave me a form to sign and then said "$20, please". I had been a customer at that bank for 30 years, and they charged me $20 for the privilege of getting at my own money? Obviously, they don't have any of my money any more - I joined a credit union instead. At least I own a piece of that outfit.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Wow! My overdraft protection fee is only $5.

 

[turbo]

At another bank in the '70's I got turned down for an auto loan. My old Mustang had been totaled by a careless heavy-equipment operator at work, so I needed a car. At the same time, my boss was trying to get his elderly mother off the road, so he proposed to sell me her low-mileage Mercedes diesel sedan for $3000, though it booked for nearly twice that. I got the numbers I needed and went to the bank for the loan. I had more money than that in the bank, but didn't want to flatten our savings account. The bank refused to loan me the money because the car was "too old", despite the extremely low miles. Needless to say, they became my ex-bank.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

You might try going to your bank and talking with them. You may even find them to be reasonable if you give them a chance [not saying they will be but it happens].

I did, thanks for the advice, but unfortunately they said there is nothing they can do. It's a computer says no thing. Banks are now run by computers not bank managers. So they are overruled by a machine. I know makes no sense but it's the way it works. I will actually try and consult the bank manager rather than the asst bank manager, but I think to be frank there is little she can do either.

Banks are in the business of legalized theft. I have had an IRA with one bank for over 10 years, in the form of a Certificate of Deposit. When it was time to renew, the interest rate was so low that I would have been losing money, after factoring the devaluation of the dollar, so I told them I wanted to roll that money over to a self-directed IRA at another institution, and wanted the money in the form of a check to that other institution. The woman at the service counter printed out the check at her workstation, gave me a form to sign and then said "$20, please". I had been a customer at that bank for 30 years, and they charged me $20 for the privilege of getting at my own money? Obviously, they don't have any of my money any more - I joined a credit union instead. At least I own a piece of that outfit.

We call them ISA's, tax exempt savings that are nearly always higher than inflation. sometimes as high as 10% if you put in a certain amount in a month up to your tax exempt limit.

$20, try $60 for any charge minimum. It's more for bounced cheques.

Why don't you ask the overdraft fees before opening an account and open an account at the bank with the lowest overdraft fees?

Actually, I don't do this and I doubt even 0.1% of bank customers do this. No one asks about bank fees like that because they'd be afraid the bank would ask them how many checks they plan to bounce. Then the customer would have to respond, "Why, none of course! I'm just hoping you charge especially high fees for bounced checks so I can feel comfortable knowing I don't share the same bank as common riffraff!"

that's about average, in fact some places are more. That's why everyone is so pissed off atm.

The last bank I was at it was more than that.

 

[turbo]

The bank that charged me $20 to print a check to close my IRA lost some much bigger customers last winter. A fellow who buys and sells timberland and harvests and sells the timber went into that bank to apply for a $1M loan to buy some new harvesting equipment. The bank turned him down, so he went across the street to the owner of the largest series of car dealerships (and the owner of a LOT of real-estate in that town). Why did he go to that guy? That fellow was a senior member of the bank's board of directors. They went to a rival bank, secured the $1M loan, and opened accounts there, then went back to the first bank together and arranged to have all of their assets transferred to the rival bank. The manager tried to stop them, but there was nothing she could do, since it was their money. The bank lost two of its wealthiest customers and a board member that day. Idiots.

That used to be a well-run hometown savings bank with decent folks. One day, after my wife and I had pretty much tapped out our accounts to buy and furnish our first real house, we heard of a real-estate auction. A farmer had bought a large chicken farm with several farm houses, and since he was falling behind in payments, FMHA forced him to auction the residential properties. On a whim, we went to the auction because we had made an offer of $25K on one of the houses previously, and were turned down. I ended up buying the place for $17K. The trick was that I had to write a deposit check to the auctioneer for $3000 that I didn't have. I wrote the check, and then called a junior loan officer at the bank and asked him to get $3000 in my checking account right away, and write up a personal loan that could be folded into my mortgage loan when we closed on the house. This was Saturday afternoon, and I caught him at home. Noontime on Monday, I dashed to the bank on my lunch break and signed the papers. They don't have personal customer service like that anymore, nor can you get any kind of action like this on a verbal promise. Sad...

 

[cristo]

1st time I went overdrawn by £1 so they charged me £30, because it was a roll over charging period ie one charging period went into another they charged me £60.

This has got to be the bank's favourite technique of getting money off people. I had this happen to me once-- I went over my £2k overdraft by about £20 because I forgot about a direct debit. I put money back in, but they charged at the end of the month, which took it overdrawn again. However, I just wrote to my branch explaining the situation, and my bank manager refunded it all. I'm lucky that my bank manager in my home town is really good, so I just write or call her whenever I've got a problem.

At the time I was unemployed, so eventually I ended up with about £300 in charges, it was at this point I left my bank refusing to pay any but the first two original charges.

What I don't understand is how/why you let £300 fines accumulate? Surely you should have just called your bank after the first charge was made, or perhaps put some money into your account to cover the charges?

I don't really see why people complain SO much about bank charges. They are all written down in the terms and conditions, so the banks are "ripping you off." Further, I'd rather the banks fined the people who do continuously go over their allowance than they start charging everyone for a bank account. The good customers should not suffer for the bad ones!

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

This has got to be the bank's favourite technique of getting money off people. I had this happen to me once-- I went over my £2k overdraft by about £20 because I forgot about a direct debit. I put money back in, but they charged at the end of the month, which took it overdrawn again. However, I just wrote to my branch explaining the situation, and my bank manager refunded it all. I'm lucky that my bank manager in my home town is really good, so I just write or call her whenever I've got a problem.

I did call over to my bank the first time the charge was made to say I couldn't afford it, and would not be able to cover the next charge period. They weren't willing to do anything about it.

You have a reasonable bank manager, mine atm are idiots. Lucky you. The staff at the bank that ended up £500 overdrawn were disgusted by the charges, they said so themselves, but the manager was unable to act without computer authority. Even going higher and then higher still resulted in tough, you know the rules and here they are in full again, without the why we can't give a customer an overdraft even though he qualifies and has qualified for the last 2 years? What can you do? I even got a credit history to show I had no debts, nor ever had apart from bank debts. They said it must be your house. The mortgage is with that bank

What I don't understand is how/why you let £300 fines accumulate? Surely you should have just called your bank after the first charge was made, or perhaps put some money into your account to cover the charges?

I did I've put over 200 pounds into the account to cover charges, but I have to live too, and being unemployed atm, how else do I eat? I have contacted them several times, but they simply say make sure the money is in there. They can't do anything else.

I don't really see why people complain SO much about bank charges. They are all written down in the terms and conditions, so the banks are "ripping you off." Further, I'd rather the banks fined the people who do continuously go over their allowance than they start charging everyone for a bank account. The good customers should not suffer for the bad ones!

We complain because even when I try to arrange a way of paying they say, computer says no. Apparently though I can have a credit card if I want.

I'm a bad customer because I'm too poor to pay for the charges? How does that work?

 

[ShawnD]

I got the numbers I needed and went to the bank for the loan. I had more money than that in the bank, but didn't want to flatten our savings account. The bank refused to loan me the money because the car was "too old", despite the extremely low miles. Needless to say, they became my ex-bank.

Visa through the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) refused to give me a $1,000 limit on my credit card, even though they held $15,000 of my money in a checking account, and my income at the time was 30% higher than the national median. Stupidity has no limits.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Visa through the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) refused to give me a $1,000 limit on my credit card, even though they held $15,000 of my money in a checking account, and my income at the time was 30% higher than the national median. Stupidity has no limits.

Amen.

I don't blame my last bank for £500 worth of charges, that was the executives fault as it went that high. I do blame the current bank manager because no matter how much I complain there is nothing they can do? That's not good banking that's persecuting people no matter how hard they try to keep up.

 

[cristo]

The staff at the bank that ended up £500 overdrawn were disgusted by the charges, they said so themselves, but the manager was unable to act without computer authority. Even going higher and then higher still resulted in tough, you know the rules and here they are in full again, without the why we can't give a customer an overdraft even though he qualifies and has qualified for the last 2 years?

It's pretty unlucky that you've got staff that bad. But, don't be dismayed-- reasonable banks do exist, you've just got to find them. I also know that there isn't a computer system doesn't exist that a manager cannot override, he probably just doesn't want to. I've got a mate that works in a bank (not mine) and I know that he cancels people's charges for them, and he's only a lowly worker.

One thing that annoys me about my bank is that they won't extend my credit limit on my credit card. It's a student card, and they say the cant, but then they say I can't apply for a "real" credit card, since I'm still technically a student (and I don't want to lose my interest free overdraft!) One guy on the phoneline just advised me to get another credit card with another company as well, which I have done, since it's easier that way!

I'm a bad customer because I'm too poor to pay for the charges? How does that work?

It makes you a bad customer because you've gone over your agreed borrowing limit without prior agreement. Whether you (or I) think it's right or not doesn't matter, since it's all written down in the rules you agreed to.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Rule shcmules. I've yet to find a decent bank in my area. But then that's Nat West and Lloyds for you.

They once refused to let my mother have her money for some odd reason, so she dumped them and changed banks, she's the one who is responsible for getting the assistant manager of my last bank fired as well for trying to charge her thousands of pounds for nothing much more than him being an idiot.

Quoting rules at someone who had no reason to be denied an overdraft is basically demeaning your customer. Even when the Bank Manager tried to work out why my overdraft was denied he couldn't, he tried to palm me off with nonsense. Two months later his assistant bank manager was fired for abusing his position.

Now I'm getting the run around despite making every effort to do my part. It's frustrating and expensive. £200 in £300 pounds out regardless? They're pulling charges out of there arses, as well since I've not been overdrawn technically in 3 months, because of money going in, it's all very odd?

I take it you haven't seen this bank clerk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBAibOQchD0&feature=related

That's what its like now, exactly what its like.

They don't use those exact words, but they say I'm sorry your loan hasn't been approved, or overdraft or whatever. Can I speak to the Bank Manager, yes but he'll say the same? Would you like a credit card? What so it's ok to run up £3000 pounds worth of debt at high interest, with my account, but not with a normal overdraft facility with lower interest, about 1.7%? Yeah that makes sense thanks but I'm already up **** creak without a paddle, later.

 

[NeoDevin]

Schrodinger's Dog: The bank, for whatever reasons, considers you a credit risk. That means that they will charge you higher interest. That is why they are willing to give you high interest credit card, but not low interest overdraft. If they are going to take the `risk' on you, then they expect to be paid for it, hence, the higher interest rate. There is nothing silly about it from the perspective of the bank.

Shawn D, Your income doesn't matter if you have poor credit (I don't know if you do). As for your savings, you can put it in a GIC and put it up as security against a credit card, but this means that you will not have access to the money. The money just being in your account is not very good security, since you could just remove it all the next day, then run up a large debt (not saying you would, but there are people who would).

All: The banks are not being stupid, or deliberately rude (unless by some chance you were rude to them when dealing with them), they are simply trying to run a profitable business. They deal with large numbers of customers every day, they can't afford to make exceptions for every second person who goes through the door. A smaller local bank focusses more on a few customers, and gets to know them. They know better who is reliable and who isn't, and since they have fewer customers, they have the time to make exceptions every now and again in order to keep customers happy.

In a larger bank, there is more burocracy for sure, but there is also more convenience (more ATMs, better online service, possibly better interest rates/lower monthly fees). Just remember, at the end of the day, the bank's job is to turn a profit. It's the bank's job neither to screw you over, nor to be your best friend. It astounds me how much people complain about fees which are clear and in writing at the time the account was opened.

I have one account which has no monthly fees, and a high interest rate, but which costs an arm and a leg to do interac transactions through (online transfers are free though), and another account for which I pay a monthly fee, have low interest, but get unlimited transactions on. Both of my accounts allow up to $1000CAD overdraft, but I have never used it (ok, once I went $1 into it). I know that if start using my debit card with my high interest account, or if I overdraft over $1000, they're going to charge me huge fees, what do I do about it? Complain that the bank is trying to screw me over with fees? Nope, if I thought that I would simply keep all my money cash in a fireproof box under my bed. Instead, I read what I signed up for, know what will result in large fees and avoid doing those things.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Schrodinger's Dog: The bank, for whatever reasons, considers you a credit risk. That means that they will charge you higher interest. That is why they are willing to give you high interest credit card, but not low interest overdraft. If they are going to take the `risk' on you, then they expect to be paid for it, hence, the higher interest rate. There is nothing silly about it from the perspective of the bank.

That's all nonsense, why did they consider me a low credit risk in Sep' 2006 enough to let me have a £300 pound overdraft, and then a high one in Feb' 2007, despite my credit not changing? I did nothing but pay wages into my account and spend it, how does that from one year to the next make me a high credit risk, given I actually gave them all my credit details and proved I wasn't? What changed, was it my credit rating? No. Quite frankly nothing changed except their minds and people got fired for it. I never had a history of poor credit so how does that work?

no it's never there fault no matter how pointless their reasoning. It can't be that they did anything wrong? Can it? My credit history was spotless, and not just spotless impeccable. You tell me how a credit history can change when the credit history hasn't changed? Then maybe, just maybe I'll agree with you.

Nothing silly when even all the bank staff found it utterly disgusting? Except the manager and his soon to be fired asst manager for trying the same crap on others? The managers was still there because he blamed his subordinate. The manager isn't still there actually he's left, and too right the guy was trying his hardest to rip off his customers.

Banks are always right, businesses don't misbehave, can you explain how that works?

 

[NeoDevin]

I ended up with about £300 in charges, it was at this point I left my bank refusing to pay any but the first two original charges.

...left that bank rejoined my old bank.

I am unemployed again so can't pay the charges?

Is this the bank you are with now? Small wonder, you overdrafted, got charged fees, and refused to pay them. And now you expect them to let you overdraft again, when you are unemployed?

ended up with £500 in charges, left that bank rejoined my old bank.

Did you pay all of these charges off? That could hurt your credit rating too.

You haven't exactly been a model customer for them, and you expect them to go beyond the terms of the agreement which you signed when opening the account? Where does this sense of entitlement come from? Why do you think you are entitled to have someone (the bank) loan you money (the overdraft) at a low interest rate, after having refused, in the past, to pay the fees set out in your account agreement?

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Yes. I paid them all off then they invented new ones that didn't exist. I paid 200 pounds in which couldn't cover 300 pounds. The charges weren't for going overdrawn they were rollover charges because the bank wouldn't stop them from going through, despite me asking them to. They can't do anything about it, because that would mean they are actually just abusing the situation to abuse someone who doesn't have a lot of money atm. And believe me I'm going to do the same thing again, refuse to pay get them all removed, and tell their bank to stick their charges. And I won't actually pay 80% of them again. If not then I'll take them to court for charging me £300 for going £1 overdrawn, and let's see how far that gets? Eh?

Banks are arseholes, in this country they charge arbitrarily and they are about to get a wake up call in the EU courts if they don't get one in the UK first. Tough luck you can't rip off people because you want to.

Charges are not related, I have no credit history from one bank to the other. Stop talking rubbish and own up to the fact that banks have gotten too big for their boots, and like persecuting those who don't have an ability to pay.

Their CEO's are scum, and are about to be labelled by the legal system as scum. Just you wait.

And not only that you haven't even bothered reading what I wrote, even when I was employed they screwed me over? What are you blithering about? Are you a bank worker, because you probably are the worst of it, when robots take over the Earth? Computer says nooooooooo...

God it's this equivocation that makes me

 

[humanino]

Once I was $1500 overdraft. They charged me a lot for that, and for the other payments I made for a couple of days before I realized what happened. Although I was not responsible for the original overdraft, they never agreed to give away the charges. The compagny responsible for my original overdraft had to pay the charges to the bank. It was resolved in a matter of days. But in between, the bank made around $1000 of pure charges for fictious numbers. The money went back and forth without anybody actually using it or doing this on purpose.

I think banking is close to the lowest form of human activity, but not quite. There are worse out there, believe me

 

[NeoDevin]

Banks are always right, businesses don't misbehave, can you explain how that works?

Did the bank at any point breach the terms of service which were agreed upon when the account was opened? From your posts so far, I would say the answer is no. If that's not the case, and they have broken the terms of service, then I would suggest contacting a lawyer, instead of complaining online. If they have followed the contract to the letter, then in what way would you say they are misbehaving? I'm not trying to suggest that businesses in general don't misbehave, just that in this particular case it doesn't appear to have happened.

You on the other hand, seem to think yourself infallible, never mind that you overdrafted your account, and then refused to pay the fees set out in your contract. ``The big bad business is misbehaving by holding me to the contract I willingly signed with them.''

Whether I think the fees they are charging you are fair, or are good for their business (in the sense of losing customers) is completely irrelevant. The fact remains, you signed a contract, and now you are complaining because of the terms of that contract.

 

[NeoDevin]

Once I was $1500 overdraft. They charged me a lot for that, and for the other payments I made for a couple of days before I realized what happened. Although I was not responsible for the original overdraft, they never agreed to give away the charges. The compagny responsible for my original overdraft had to pay the charges to the bank. It was resolved in a matter of days. But in between, the bank made around $1000 of pure charges for fictious numbers. The money went back and forth without anybody actually using it or doing this on purpose.

I think banking is close to the lowest form of human activity, but not quite. There are worse out there, believe me

It is an inconvenience, and costs the bank money when an account is overdrawn. They have a set fee structure in place for this reason (true the fees are more than the cost, but they are trying to make a profit). Why do you think the company responsible should not have to pay the charges?

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Did the bank at any point breach the terms of service which were agreed upon when the account was opened? From your posts so far, I would say the answer is no. If that's not the case, and they have broken the terms of service, then I would suggest contacting a lawyer, instead of complaining online. If they have followed the contract to the letter, then in what way would you say they are misbehaving? I'm not trying to suggest that businesses in general don't misbehave, just that in this particular case it doesn't appear to have happened.

You on the other hand, seem to think yourself infallible, never mind that you overdrafted your account, and then refused to pay the fees set out in your contract. ``The big bad business is misbehaving by holding me to the contract I willingly signed with them.''

Whether I think the fees they are charging you are fair, or are good for their business (in the sense of losing customers) is completely irrelevant. The fact remains, you signed a contract, and now you are complaining because of the terms of that contract.

They did? Because they never gave a reason why despite me having a net income 8 times the overdraft rate they would not let me have an overdraft according to their rules. They just said computer says no. I thought I made that clear, but obviously not.

They did and the upper management have either been sacked or moved out of harms way.

Good they were trying it on.

 

[NeoDevin]

They did? Because they never gave a reason why despite me having a net income 8 times the overdraft rate they would not let me have an overdraft according to their rules. They just said computer says no. I thought I made that clear, but obviously not.

Did it say in the agreement that they had to give you an overdraft, under some particular circumstances?

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Did it say in the agreement that they had to give you an overdraft, under some particular circumstances?

Yep, you are allowed an overdraft up to 1/3 your net income. Simple as that. Obviously from one month to the next that hadn't changed. They told me it had because computer said no, I proved my credit history hadn't changed from one month to the next. They did it anyway. Then they tried to fob me off. My mother then got charged £2000 because someone in the bank had moved money over incorrectly. A person then got fired, the bank manager no longer works there. You decide?

And now my new bank is trying it on too. Perhaps the managers since they live 12 houses down are all in cahoots, but they aint getting a penny out of me for their stupid crap.

 

[turbo]

When I started banking at the local savings bank, they paid fair interest on savings, and the interest would actually ramp up as you kept more money in the account. Checking was free, and again, if you stayed above a minimum balance, they paid interest on the checking account, as well. Nowadays, they have established punitive fee schedules for all kinds of transactions that used to be free. The bank has added branches in town after town, has totally remodeled their main branch, and has built a huge new business center near its main branch. They pay as little as possible on all types of accounts. When I pretty much cleaned out a savings account to start a money market account with a large national bank, the manager came out to sign the check (no teller was authorized to endorse a check of that size) and she spent 10 minutes haranguing me, trying to get me to put the money in one of their money-market account, which paid less than 60% of the rate I was promised at my new bank. Finally, I had to say (loudly, so others could hear) "That is MY money and I'm withdrawing it, so sign the damned check and pass it over!"

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Banks are no longer banks they are purely businesses that abuse their customers in any way they can. They try it on. My friend went in their the other day to pay in some money, they said have you had a talk with your bank manager recently, he said no he didn't need to. They kept him there and wouldn't let him leave, he kept saying I'm ok thanks been with you for years no problems, they wouldn't let him leave until he'd talked to the bank manager been offered a new deal he didn't need, despite him saying several times that he was perfectly happy with his account: now could he go.

They forced him to sit down and talk to the manager, even though he said exactly the same thing over and over again, they offered him credit cards, new accounts, and all sorts of offers. I just wonder how they get away with this? They are simply scum, not the people doing this the people at the top that think they can do this? It's weird? They have gotten it into their heads that they have so much power that not even their customers opinions matter any more. You will go into debt and we will force you into debt, and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

[NeoDevin]

Yes. I paid them all off then they invented new ones that didn't exist. I paid 200 pounds in which couldn't cover 300 pounds. The charges weren't for going overdrawn they were rollover charges because the bank wouldn't stop them from going through, despite me asking them to.

I'm still running on the assumption that the fee structure was made clear when the account was opened.

They can't do anything about it, because that would mean they are actually just abusing the situation to abuse someone who doesn't have a lot of money atm.

No, they entered into a contract with you, and are now holding you to the terms of it. The fact that you overdrafted your account and cannot pay the associated fees does not mean they are abusing you. You refuse to admit that you entered into a contract with the bank, you overdrafted your account, and therefore you got yourself into this predicament. It's neither the banks fault nor concern what your situation is, nor should it be. If you couldn't keep to your end of the agreement, you should never have signed.

And believe me I'm going to do the same thing again, refuse to pay get them all removed, and tell their bank to stick their charges. And I won't actually pay 80% of them again. If not then I'll take them to court for charging me £300 for going £1 overdrawn, and let's see how far that gets? Eh?

And (if they decide to take it this far) they will bring the agreement you signed, outlining the fee structure, and bring documentation showing exactly where the fees come from. More likely though, they will simply write off the fees, and refuse to grant any overdraft next time, instead simply bouncing the payments.

Tough luck you can't rip off people because you want to.

No, but you can rip someone off if they willingly and knowingly enter into a contract stating that you can.

Charges are not related, I have no credit history from one bank to the other.

In the US and Canada at least (I'm not in the UK, so I don't know for sure about there) you have a credit rating with a few different companies, which follows you no matter where you go. I don't imagine the situation is much different in the UK.
Just searched, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating under the heading `Credit Rating Agencies'. Apparently you guys are in the same boat as us, and your credit rating follows you everywhere.

Stop talking rubbish and own up to the fact that banks have gotten too big for their boots, and like persecuting those who don't have an ability to pay.

Their CEO's are scum, and are about to be labelled by the legal system as scum. Just you wait.

And then the name calling starts...

And not only that you haven't even bothered reading what I wrote, even when I was employed they screwed me over?

You keep saying they screwed you over, but I haven't yet seen you point out exactly where they breached the contract you signed. You seem to have this sense that the contract is only valid when it works in your favor.

What are you blithering about? Are you a bank worker, because you probably are the worst of it, when robots take over the Earth? Computer says nooooooooo...

I'm not a bank worker, no. I'm a physicist. I just like to make sure I understand somthing before I sign it. I know what the fee structure is at my banks (not off by heart though) well enough to not acquire any unexpected fees.

 

[NeoDevin]

When I started banking at the local savings bank, they paid fair interest on savings, and the interest would actually ramp up as you kept more money in the account. Checking was free, and again, if you stayed above a minimum balance, they paid interest on the checking account, as well. Nowadays, they have established punitive fee schedules for all kinds of transactions that used to be free. The bank has added branches in town after town, has totally remodeled their main branch, and has built a huge new business center near its main branch. They pay as little as possible on all types of accounts. When I pretty much cleaned out a savings account to start a money market account with a large national bank, the manager came out to sign the check (no teller was authorized to endorse a check of that size) and she spent 10 minutes haranguing me, trying to get me to put the money in one of their money-market account, which paid less than 60% of the rate I was promised at my new bank. Finally, I had to say (loudly, so others could hear) "That is MY money and I'm withdrawing it, so sign the damned check and pass it over!"

The situation is unfortunate, but apparently the local savings banks goals changed (maybe they were bought out by a company with different goals?). The fact remains that you are perfectly free to take your money to a bank that is willing to pay more interest/better transaction fees/whatever. I have closed a couple accounts with banks because I was offered better interest/fee structure somewhere else. In each case I went back to my original bank, and asked them to at least match the offer. A couple times this has worked (mostly with my checking account, where each time I find a better offer somewhere else, they beat it), other times it hasn't (with my savings, where someone else was offering a higher interest rate, so I moved my money). There is nothing inherently wrong with this situation, it's simply a free market economy.

 

[Art]

There is something you can do. Here's an article about a current court case currently being taken by the OFT in the UK.

http://www.personalfinanceclaims.com/category/bank-charges/

This has been a frontline issue for a while now and there is a standard claim form available on some website but I can't find it right now.

 

[cristo]

This has been a frontline issue for a while now and there is a standard claim form available on some website but I can't find it right now.

There used to be a form available here but the Financial Ombudsman is not providing support on these issues until the court case brought about by the Office of Fair Trading is over.

 

[cristo]

In the US and Canada at least (I'm not in the UK, so I don't know for sure about there) you have a credit rating with a few different companies, which follows you no matter where you go. I don't imagine the situation is much different in the UK.
Just searched, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating under the heading `Credit Rating Agencies'. Apparently you guys are in the same boat as us, and your credit rating follows you everywhere.

Yes, credit ratings are dealt with by a couple of central companies. You know, you can get a copy of your credit rating if you apply to one of the companies (SD).

I'm afraid I agree with NeoDavin here, for the most part. I don't agree that £30 overdraft fees are "fair" in the sense that they are unnecessarily large, but they are not unfair in the sense that they are unpublished or unexpected.

 

[humanino]

It is an inconvenience, and costs the bank money when an account is overdrawn.

Sorry but I do not believe it would cost them much more than a few $, or maybe tens of $ that one account is $500 overdraft for like 4 days. They made $1000 for a $500 credit of 4 days (technically even less than that, since I spent about half of the overdraft in bewteen). This is insane when you think about it. As a courtesy to the customer, not responsible for someone else mistake, they could have canceled the charges.

In any case, frankly waking up every morning asking myself how much I am going to make today, knowing that 90% of it is taken from people's pocket, thank you I'd rather do something else with my life

 

[Evo]

All of my banking is free, unless I dip into my credit line.

I've had two errors. First one was a bank error where they debited my account for $270.50 for a check written for $27.50. As soon as I brought it to their attention, they corrected it.

The second was not a bank error but an error by my car insurance company <cough> AAA <cough>. They did an automatic bank debit each month of $127.00. Except one month they accidently debited me $1,270.00. This caused several checks to bounce, it caused me overdraft fees and insufficient check charges, none of which were my fault. They were impossible to deal with. After 3 months of daily calls, they said that they would send me a refund by mail, but not willing to cover the hundreds of dollars in overdraft fees. Although they had electronically debited me the wrong amount, they said that they would not electronically credit me back for the error.

<cough AAA cough> Make your own decision.

 

[Art]

All of my banking is free, unless I dip into my credit line.

I've had two errors. First one was a bank error where they debited my account for $270.50 for a check written for $27.50. As soon as I brought it to their attention, they corrected it.

The second was not a bank error but an error by my car insurance company <cough> AAA <cough>. They did an automatic bank debit each month of $127.00. Except one month they accidently debited me $1,270.00. This caused several checks to bounce, it caused me overdraft fees and insufficient check charges, none of which were my fault. They were impossible to deal with. After 3 months of daily calls, they said that they would send me a refund by mail, but not willing to cover the hundreds of dollars in overdraft fees. Although they had electronically debited me the wrong amount, they said that they would not electronically credit me back for the error.

<cough AAA cough> Make your own decision.

That's why standing orders are safer than direct debits. I'm always very reluctant to give anybody unfettered access to my current account.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't understand the attitude that enables people to enter a contract, break it, then blame the other party for enforcing the penalties they agreed to when entering into the contract in the first place.

Take responsibility for your mistakes.

 

[NeoDevin]

Sorry but I do not believe it would cost them much more than a few $, or maybe tens of $ that one account is $500 overdraft for like 4 days.

It's $500 of unexpected negative cashflow for the bank. Believe it or not, that can actually get expensive. Of course they charge a lot more than it costs them, that's called `profit margin'. There are many companies which charge hundreds if not thousands of % profit margin, which we willingly pay for the convenience of the service they provide. If someone doesn't want to pay overdraft fees, then why would they allow their account to go into overdraft? What would such a person do if there was no bank to provide them the overdraft service? The bank has the right to charge whatever price they think fair (within gov't regulations) for their services, just as each of us has the right to not use those services if we think the price unfair.

To cry foul at the bank for charging fees which were agreed upon, in writing, upon the opening of the account is simply immature, and refusing to take responsibility for one's actions. And if people talk half as badly to their bankers/bank managers as the talk about them on here, it's no wonder they won't give them a break on the fees.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I'm still running on the assumption that the fee structure was made clear when the account was opened.

It was I got a £300 overdraft, which was then refused under the same conditions, nothing had changed, I went out of my way to prove that. Since you patently aren't listening to a word I say I'll ignore the rest. It's not worth my time repeating myself, you're possibly one of the same people that think banks are nice lovely businesses that love their customers. Welcome to the real world. Have you ever wondered why everyone hates banks? It's because they are abusive to their customers, by charging ridiculous fees and doing their utmost to force people into debt to rake in the profits. Simple as that. The only people who don't hate banks I've met are the people who work there, and even they aren't particularly impressed by them, sometimes.

http://www.personalfinanceclaims.com/category/bank-charges/[/QUOTE]

Thanks Art, finally someone who is listening.

I don't understand the attitude that enables people to enter a contract, break it, then blame the other party for enforcing the penalties they agreed to when entering into the contract in the first place.

Take responsibility for your mistakes.

I didn't are you reading any of this or am I just talking to a brick wall? Like with the other guy?

They broke their own terms. I refused to pay the first time, they wrote it all off except the original charge. The second time, they broke their contract and abused their own terms. The third time, they have been charging me for going overdrawn for the last 5 months despite only being overdrawn for 2 of them. Is that clear or do you want me to say it again?

 

[cristo]

They broke their own terms. I refused to pay the first time, they wrote it all off except the original charge. The second time, they broke their contract and abused their own terms.

How did the second bank break their terms of contract? From what I read, you agreed a £300 overdraft facility with the bank, then reduced this to £50 since you didn't need it anymore. Later, you went into the bank and asked them to increase your overdraft once more, to £150. If this is the correct scenario, then I can't see where the bank broke any terms of contract. I will bet that their terms say something like "a customer passing criteria x is eligible for an overdraft of y% their annual income" and not "a customer passing criteria x is entitled to an overdraft of y% their annual income." These are very different things. The bank does not have to provide you with an overdraft if it doesn't want to, regardless of your financial situation.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

How did the second bank break their terms of contract? From what I read, you agreed a £300 overdraft facility with the bank, then reduced this to £50 since you didn't need it anymore. Later, you went into the bank and asked them to increase your overdraft once more, to £150. If this is the correct scenario, then I can't see where the bank broke any terms of contract. I will bet that their terms say something like "a customer passing criteria x is eligible for an overdraft of y% their annual income" and not "a customer passing criteria x is entitled to an overdraft of y% their annual income." These are very different things. The bank does not have to provide you with an overdraft if it doesn't want to, regardless of your financial situation.

They refused to let me have an overdraft despite 1/3 of my income being about £350. According to their terms the only reason they could deny this is if I a)had poor credit history b) there was bad equity on a pre existing loan or mortgage. They said you can have a credit card £3000 limit though, I was not amused. Why am I the only customer at that bank not allowed a 1/3 of your income overdraft, riddle me that? No one ever explained why they just said I couldn't have it because the computer had refused it, no reason nothing. It's pathetic frankly. I tell you what I think is the reason, they had flagged that I didn't own a credit card so the computer refused it to try and put pressure on me to get a credit card, which just so happened to be a drive they were doing at the time. Despite repeatedly requesting a reason why the overdraft facility had suddenly been reused for no reason, they refused to answer. I picked up my money and walked. Basically because they wanted to force me into credit, at 13/7% instead of 1.7%. I was not amused. And the bank manager just fobbed me off, trying to explain the reasoning in terms of? To be frank I don't even think he understood why it had happened, in fact at one point he said, I know the reason doesn't seem obvious but there must of been some reason. Yeah I know, you just know full well you can't come out and say you are trying to get all customers into credit, rather than on overdrafts.

The bank can do whatever it likes, but since they're losing a lifetime customer, do you think it's wise to screw your customers over for no reason? Or at least no reason your prepared to admit. In the end how much money did they lose, on my custom, interest and mortgage being elsewhere? A truck load, idiots.

Since one of the morons got fired for even more dubious practices a few months later, and I haven't heard hide nor hair of the other guy since. I'm hoping they got fed up with them and sacked them both? Don't know though?

So Mr Bank manager can you explain why you lost this customer, and a rather sizeable credit agreement? Because I'm an idiot who can't overrule a computer sir. Er pick up your pay check on the way out and your P45.

 

[brewnog]

They charged interest recently and put me into the red by a £1 or so, and then have proceeded to charge me £200 again for charges.

Firstly, if you were in the black, why did they charge interest?

Secondly, £200 is a LOT for a charge for exceeding an overdraft limit by £1. Which bank is this? You ought to look into getting some advice from the financial ombudsman's service, though I sincerely doubt that they imposed a £200 charge just for exceeding your limit by £1.

How about this: Try and be more careful with your money! If you're aware of your incomings and outgoings, you can quite easily avoid going overdrawn. If you find this difficult, ask your bank to prevent your account from exceeding your agreed overdraft limit.

If you can't get an agreed overdraft, the reason is most likely that your credit history is poor enough for them to consider you too great a financial risk (probably because of all those times you've exceeded your agreed overdraft limit, and not been able to pay it off). If you want to know for sure, get a copy of your credit report.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Firstly, if you were in the black, why did they charge interest?

Secondly, £200 is a LOT for a charge for exceeding an overdraft limit by £1. Which bank is this? You ought to look into getting some advice from the financial ombudsman's service, though I sincerely doubt that they imposed a £200 charge just for exceeding your limit by £1.

How about this: Try and be more careful with your money! If you're aware of your incomings and outgoings, you can quite easily avoid going overdrawn. If you find this difficult, ask your bank to prevent your account from exceeding your agreed overdraft limit.

If you can't get an agreed overdraft, the reason is most likely that your credit history is poor enough for them to consider you too great a financial risk (probably because of all those times you've exceeded your agreed overdraft limit, and not been able to pay it off). If you want to know for sure, get a copy of your credit report.

That's how much the eventual charges will come to, once I've finished paying them off. And yes I should, but to be honest, I have a better solution, why not just leave the bank, open a new account at another bank, or building society and forget they exist. If they then want to take me to court for the money they are welcome. How about that?

I'd be surprised if they would even bother trying to reclaim £300 or whatever it turns out to be. But if they want to charge me for something I haven't done, then let's see what a judge thinks.

They seem to think that because I am poor they can just keep racking up the fees until it reaches thousands of pounds, I for one am not going to put up with it. I've put £200 in that account already to try and keep up and it's not enough, so screw them.

I remember a time when you could trust the banks, they were reasonable, they would not let you take out credit without subjecting you to rigorous practices, then the conservatives removed them all, and since, anyone can rack up £40,000 worth of debt in not time. It's sad really. Because what they are essentially doing is using lax lending laws to exploit human nature. I mean you don't expect business to care about anything but profit. But you do at least expect a modicum of customer service with that stabbing you in the back, as they have in my case. Professionalism it seems is not a word my bank understands nor cares about. Still there's a reason why Nat West was voted one of the worst banks in the country. I believe the worst was The Bank of Scotland, owned guess who by? Nat West. If you want a decent bank I've heard HSBC aren't total ****s, my next point of call.

 

[NeoDevin]

HSBC will look at your credit history as well, and see the overdrafts, and the refusal to pay, and will probably refuse to grant you overdraft as well. You're responsible for your own situation, for the contracts you enter into. Stop blaming your own screwups on others, and take responsibility for your own money.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

HSBC will look at your credit history as well, and see the overdrafts, and the refusal to pay, and will probably refuse to grant you overdraft as well. You're responsible for your own situation, for the contracts you enter into. Stop blaming your own screwups on others, and take responsibility for your own money.

I haven't got a bad credit history, is no one paying attention here , that is a last resort anyway if they refuse to remove the charges. And if they don't contest it or I win then they can't put it as a mark against my credit history. To be frank I'm pretty sure banks don't press to take that tiny amount of money to court, it's worth more in administration than they are ever likely to get back. Assuming I open an account now my credit history is currently flawless, as I said before. So there's not going to be anything on it anyway. I love it how many people think that what the bank is doing is fine. I just hope it never happens to you, because you'll be surprised at how annoying it is. Especially when without friends and family I'd basically be even more in debt probably to the tune of another £100.

 

[cristo]

And yes I should, but to be honest, I have a better solution, why not just leave the bank, open a new account at another bank, or building society and forget they exist. If they then want to take me to court for the money they are welcome. How about that?

But this is only going to affect you and your credit rating. The bank won't think twice about losing £200, but you will be hit hard when you try and open an account at a different bank and realize that your credit rating has become even worse.

I'd be surprised if they would even bother trying to reclaim £300 or whatever it turns out to be. But if they want to charge me for something I haven't done, then let's see what a judge thinks.

If you can't afford to pay the charges, then I doubt you'll be able to afford lawyers fees to take a bank to court!

I remember a time when you could trust the banks, they were reasonable, they would not let you take out credit without subjecting you to rigorous practices, then the conservatives removed them all, and since, anyone can rack up £40,000 worth of debt in not time. It's sad really. Because what they are essentially doing is using lax lending laws to exploit human nature. I mean you don't expect business to care about anything but profit. But you do at least expect a modicum of customer service with that stabbing you in the back, as they have in my case. Professionalism it seems is not a word my bank understands nor cares about.

But you can't blame a bank for people getting into too much debt. In order to borrow money, you have to be over 18, i.e. an adult. Why should the bank have to hold an adults hand when making a decision? If someone is not able to pay back the money borrowed, then they should have thought more seriously before borrowing the money.

Still there's a reason why Nat West was voted one of the worst banks in the country. I believe the worst was The Bank of Scotland, owned guess who by? Nat West. If you want a decent bank I've heard HSBC aren't total ****s, my next point of call.

I'm with Natwest and think they're a decent bank. They've got UK callcentres, and actually give out the number to your branch so you can call your manager direct. Further, the one time I had to contact the complaints department (when I moved to university they sent my card to the wrong address, then canceled it, then sent another that got lost) my problem was resolved efficiently within a few weeks, and they gave me a very reasonable amount of compensation. That might be because I've been with them ever since I got my first account when I was 13, and had never gone overdrawn or anything like that.

If you keep changing banks, then this will show on your record, and you're a lot less likely to be given the perks that a "good" customer would be.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Well like I said if I open an account now, I am fine, because my credit history is fine. I don't care what they think they're doing here, I'm not paying it. It's ridiculous. If they'd of just charged me once for going overdrawn, but the fact that it rolled over without my knowledge meant I got another fine and another roll over, before I realized what was going on. Of course I'd already asked them to remove it by then. It's not holding my hand it's just not being aware of rollover fees. Whereby they charge you twice for the same charge. Of course they neglected to tell me this when I asked them to remove the charges. I am simply not in a position to pay off that much in that short a period atm. And they have already told me they can't remove the charges for charges for charges. So we're stuck.

Christo I appreciate your advice really. And I know they are one of the best banks for students, I was one. And they were really good then. I never got any of these problems then, in fact they'd remove excess charges when I asked. But apparently now its all different.

 

[cristo]

Assuming I open an account now my credit history is currently flawless, as I said before.

But how do you know this? You're just guessing! I'd say that if you've gone over your overdraft in more than one bank, and haven't paid the charges, then you're very likely to have a poor credit rating!

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

But how do you know this? You're just guessing! I'd say that if you've gone over your overdraft in more than one bank, and haven't paid the charges, then you're very likely to have a poor credit rating!

I know because I had to get one to prove to my last bank my credit was ok. And since I've not taken out any loans since then or any other credit, or reneged on payments of said loans, I can't see how it would have changed. 1st bank I had them removed after kicking up a fuss. Second bank I paid because I was working but left the bank. So there's no reason for a poor credit rating at all. And since its under £1000 pounds you can get the fees paid if you win I believe as its small claims. To be frank they won't contest it most likely anyway. Or I can fill in that form and wait for the procedure to begin. Of course all cases of this nature are currently frozen until the test case goes through. Like I said that's a last resort if they refuse to be reasonable about it though.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Not that anyone's interested but I wrote a letter to the bank yesterday and hand delivered it, saying that I would not pay the charges and would be moving my account elsewhere if they were not removed. Since then I've accrued another charge, because the interest on the charges was more than I had accounted for, which then took me 40p overdrawn, of course because this month and every month are a rollover month, that's another £56 in charges in this diabolical lottery. My mistake, obviously I hadn't accounted for the mysterious leap in interest from £3.46 to £5.40 despite owing less than the last time. Honestly I just can't figure it out any more? Is the interest x percent? Or is it not? I am actually not bad at maths, but I think the bank is working on some advanced quantum system where there is a superposition of interest, interest, and no interest, no interest. Because obviously there are two sets of interest and no interest, thus the extra \dag charge applies.

\dag The bank can and will obey all laws of quantum indeterminacy when working on your accounts, we reserve the right to screw you over accordingly.