£25 bank charge for 33p over limit

Neodite · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:16

Wicksta said:
So on one hand you're saying that 50p could send you over the edge in a month and on the other hand you're saying you'd gladly pay for your bank account? Why don't you save the £10 a month or whatever instead and then you wouldn't have to worry about the 50p?

Surely the genuinely poor will be worse off if banks start charging for accounts.

50p that im not exspecting yes... £10 every month no.

My post was an example, dont pick away at it to try and prove you false point..

The fact is the banks DONT pay your bill, they charge you to let you know you WOULD have been 50p over, the bill remains unpaid and your stung with a charge. And if your tight on money which many many many people are, once your £25 one month, its a downward spiral of more and more charges.

Open your eyes, not everyone is well off

RDM · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:16

Wicksta said:
So basically we'll all be subsidising laziness.

Alternatively the lazy have stopped subsidising us. Depends on which way you look at it.

scorza · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:18

Neodite said:
The problem is tho the banks make it WORSE for people.

Say i had £30 in the bank for my phone bill, but i didnt notice i sent a picture msg (50p) so my phone contract DD comes out my account..

OOOOPPPPSSS not anough money, so my phonebill is left UNPAID and ontop of that tha bank sends out a £25 letter to tell me this. I then get a letter from phone contract tell me i owe them £30.50.

Now this has not happend to me, but how tight my money is it could one day. So why dont the banks send you a warning so you can out the last 50p in and pay your bill? instead of putting you into £25.50 dept? Instead of the 50p you would have been?

This is why the banks are in court, and i hope it does come back that they have to pay the money back to people, and i don't mind paying the bank a monthly fee and to stop free banking all togeather, hell it might even improve then

This is what agreed overdrafts are for, in case of unforeseen circumstances when you have to spend more than you have. The idea being that you then adjust your spending accordingly to pay the overdraft off over the next few months. Unfortunately a lot of people these days seem to think that because they have an agreed overdraft limit they have to reduce their account balance to be as close to that limit as possible, which limits their cash flexibility and so people end up 33p over their limit and the bank gets angry and charges them a penalty.

If you only have £30 in your bank account I would suggest you ought to arrange an overdraft for that account.

Unfortunately banks are not run as a public service, maybe they are guilty of encouraging people to go over their limits - however ultimately you have to take control of your own finances, the banks can't help you with that.

Dangerous · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:23

DominicStar said:
Might have to add the interest on to this mind

Nope the £1/per day is the only fee you pay for either 1p or £2500

Hatter The Mad · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:26

dirtydog said:
I do think there are often inadequate consequences for failing to play by the rules. When you hear of people being convicted of benefit fraud to the tune of tens of thousands, not being jailed, and being allowed to repay it at 50p a week, there is something very wrong somewhere.

I digress...

Shut up, dirtydog.

I don't like agreeing with thou

Sinque · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:35

I'd just leave the bank and close the account. Start up with Lloyds or something. I've got a student account and i'm constantly going into my O/D, only by like £5-£10 though which gets replaced instantly. I get a nice letter saying I need to sort it out or ring them within the next week but there are no charges

Wicksta · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:35

Neodite said:
Open your eyes, not everyone is well off

Then maybe stop spending £30 on a mobile phone bill every month?

LiE · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:42

Why don't banks just not allow you to go over your agreed overdraft? I mean, if for some reason I tried to spend £200 and I only had £199 in my account, I'd prefer to be declined, rather than pay £25 extra.

YZFAndy · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:51

dirtydog said:
The banks are in court because people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own finances, instead expecting their bank to do it for them.

No the banks are in court for unjustifiable large fees. I have just had to pay more than 7000% interest on 50p for less than 8 hours for a failed direct debit that they never even honoured.

justify that! And lets not talk rubbish about punishment or its the only way they can get poeple to listen because a bank has no right to punish someone. The only response or reason they can give for the fine is due to fees incurred to them. This is where the law has a right to poke its nose in banks business because these figures they try and justify are just theft.

Basher · 30 Oct 2009 at 14:55

YZFAndy said:
just theft.

Theft? How are they theft?

FTM · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:00

Jez said:
No, but is this not a wholly pointless service? I have my overdraft set at a level which provides sufficient buffer anyway.

exactly..we set ours so in the event neither of our wages went in the overdraft would still cover bills such as the mortgage..we were able to set this limit becuase of our many years of charge free banking because we managed our money effectively...yes you might get a freak accurrence but thats why you then set your overdraft to cover such eventualities

regulus · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:00

Weird. Was in OD by accident on one of my accounts for around 6 months before noticing. Never got charged a thing.

The Running Man · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:02

YZFAndy said:
No the banks are in court for unjustifiable large fees. I have just had to pay more than 7000% interest on 50p for less than 8 hours for a failed direct debit that they never even honoured.

justify that! And lets not talk rubbish about punishment or its the only way they can get poeple to listen because a bank has no right to punish someone. The only response or reason they can give for the fine is due to fees incurred to them. This is where the law has a right to poke its nose in banks business because these figures they try and justify are just theft.

as i said, do you think the bank incus a lower cost for dealing with your inability to handle money compared to someone else who went 10,000 times more overdrawn than you did? proportionally it would not..yet because u want to live in a world of no responsibility and cannot see beyond, 'i only went 50p over, be pitiful on me'...that is costs the same for the bank to process as a larger amount...

YZFAndy · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:03

Basher said:
Theft? How are they theft?

Because they can only justify taking these fines from you for fees incurred to them which is often only pence but then try and charge yourself £35.

The fact the courts are investigating all banks pretty much sums it up.

bobbydigital · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:04

I don't know if this page has been linked before, I started reading the thread but the arguing got all too much for me. I've never been overdrawn or charged before but I have heard of lot's of people using this site and gettting hundreds of pounds back in charges.

Basher · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:08

YZFAndy said:
Because they can only justify taking these fines from you for fees incurred to them

I don't understand why that is the case though. You are taking money without prior agreement so it makes sense for them to charge for that, and why shouldn't they profit off it.

YZFAndy · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:08

Nickg said:
as i said, do you think the bank incus a lower cost for dealing with your inability to handle money compared to someone else who went 10,000 times more overdrawn than you did? proportionally it would not..yet because u want to live in a world of no responsibility and cannot see beyond, 'i only went 50p over, be pitiful on me'...that is costs the same for the bank to process as a larger amount...

Who said i didn't pay them or expect not to. My argument and the laws is over the amounts.

And who the hell are you to tell me i can't handle my money. you have no idea of why my finances weren't correct on the day someone choose to take out a variable[FONT=&quot][/FONT] direct debit.

You sound like a right nanny stated twit.

gjc10212 · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:10

Handbags ladies

put them down, breathe and replace your tampons......

Neodite · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:12

Basher said:
I don't understand why that is the case though. You are taking money without prior agreement so it makes sense for them to charge for that, and why shouldn't they profit off it.

You dont take any money from the banks, you get charged for "you didnt have enough funds"

Say you had £10 in the bank and £12 DD tried to go out.

The bank would send you a letter saying this amount tried to come out blah blah not enough money and wack a £35 charge with it.

So instead of having £10 and a bill unpaid. Or -£2 the bank charge you so your now.

-£25 and still have a £12 DD unpaid. This is why its unfair, as your not acctually taking a thing from the bank

Basher · 30 Oct 2009 at 15:13

Neodite said:
You dont take any money from the banks, you get charged for "you didnt have enough funds"

Say you had £10 in the bank and £12 DD tried to go out.

The bank would send you a letter saying this amount tried to come out blah blah not enough money and wack a £35 charge with it.

So instead of having £10 and a bill unpaid. Or -£2 the bank charge you so your now.

-£25 and still have a £12 DD unpaid. This is why its unfair, as your not acctually taking a thing from the bank

I'm not talking about DD I am talking about unarranged overdrafts, where you do infact take money.