Banks win Supreme Court case on overdraft charges

[growse]

how nice it must be to have enough of an income that you can rely on it to cover all of your outgoings when something unexpected comes up. unfortunately millions of others are not in the same position.


not simples, not in the bloody slightest.

Don't make the mistake of confusing having a low income with being bad at managing finances. There are plenty of well-off people who get charged, and plenty of people in poverty who never do.

I've been in the situation myself where I've been charged whilst having a reasonable income (forgot to do a transfer between accounts), and I've also been in the situation of living off £44 a week for 8 months and never being charged. Even on that income I managed to save a tiny amount each week for a rainy day.

You have to make sacrifices for things you can't afford, and that's what a lot of people have trouble doing. Want to go to the pub? Can't afford it. Want to spend an extra 39p on lunch to get a chocolate bar? Can't afford it. I was literally budgeting from penny to penny when I was on JSA.

If you're worried about being charged, don't set up DDs and pay for stuff in cash. It's not particularly difficult.

 

[Abraham]

**************** What's your issue? You must work for a bank and have shares as well.

Personal attacks are strictly against the rules.

why am I an idiot for thinking people should manage their own financial affairs? I handle mine absolutely fine, I don't spend money on things I don't need to and so I have some kind of cushion if I do need to. I'm by no means rolling in cash or oblivious to what it's like to live on a shoestring but that doesn't make me incapable of not going overdrawn, if it happens and it's your fault why shouldn't you get charged?

 

[arknor]

If you cant afford to run a car dont have one.
It doesnt matter if you earn £50 a week or £500. Live within your means.

without a car some jobs are to far or its cheaper to have a car you realise bus fares are ridiculous?
i fear some of you dont live in the real world

 

[kylew]

Sorry I haven't really got a clue what you're on about. Until you explain to me the benefit of leaving a direct debit going when you are so close to the breadline then I'm out.

That's not the point, and yeah you do have a clue what I'm on about, but to prove your "point" you're pretending you don't.

DD charges are ridiculous, for something that doesn't cost the bank a penny, spending more money than you have with unauthorised overdrafts are a different matter to failed DDs.

Even then, with overdrafts, they should just block the transaction yet they allow people to spend more money than they have so that they can charge them.

My point is DD charges aren't in the slightest bit fair.

I don't understand the mentality of those who claim them to be fair.

 

[Abraham]

without a car some jobs are to far or its cheaper to have a car you realise bus fares are ridiculous?
i fear some of you dont live in the real world

not having a car is obviously a restriction, but that doesnt make it a neccessity

 

[kylew]

why am I an idiot for thinking people should manage their own financial affairs? I handle mine absolutely fine, I don't spend money on things I don't need to and so I have some kind of cushion if I do need to. I'm by no means rolling in cash or oblivious to what it's like to live on a shoestring but that doesn't make me incapable of not going overdrawn, if it happens and it's your fault why shouldn't you get charged?

A failed DD doesn't equate to spending money you don't have. Why is it so hard for some people to understand this?

Why SHOULD people be charged for them?

 

[growse]

That's not the point, and yeah you do have a clue what I'm on about, but to prove your "point" you're pretending you don't.

DD charges are ridiculous, for something that doesn't cost the bank a penny, spending more money than you have with unauthorised overdrafts are a different matter to failed DDs.

Even then, with overdrafts, they should just block the transaction yet they allow people to spend more money than they have so that they can charge them.

My point is DD charges aren't in the slightest bit fair.

I don't understand the mentality of those who claim them to be fair.

With all this anti-DD vitriol, why not just choose to not use them? Pay by cheque?

 

[Abraham]

Even then, with overdrafts, they should just block the transaction yet they allow

Most banks offer an account that will do this, however people choose not to use them. When I had my first bank account it was next to impossible for me to go overdrawn on it. I still have that bank account (although I don't use it) and guess what? it's still almost impossible for me to go overdrawn, I'd have to make a concerted effort to do it.

 

[Wicksta]

That's not the point, and yeah you do have a clue what I'm on about, but to prove your "point" you're pretending you don't.

DD charges are ridiculous, for something that doesn't cost the bank a penny, spending more money than you have with unauthorised overdrafts are a different matter to failed DDs.

Even then, with overdrafts, they should just block the transaction yet they allow people to spend more money than they have so that they can charge them.

My point is DD charges aren't in the slightest bit fair.

I don't understand the mentality of those who claim them to be fair.

Again absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.

 

[Abraham]

A failed DD doesn't equate to spending money you don't have. Why is it so hard for some people to understand this?

Why SHOULD people be charged for them?

in what possible way doesn't it? there isn't enough money in your account, yet you are trying to spend it, so you're trying to spend money you don't have.

 

[Bennie-Mac]

I havent read through the whole thread as i feel its going to be a big repeat of the other one, but does anyone know if you can still reclaim charges if you are in financial hardship?

 

[Abraham]

I havent read through the whole thread as i feel its going to be a big repeat of the other one, but does anyone know if you can still reclaim charges if you are in financial hardship?

I think it depends on your bank, as this is a policy they have rather than the result of any legislation:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/blog/2009/nov/24/bank-charges-ruling

10.52am: My colleague Jill Insley has just spoken to Lloyds/Hbos (is this a good time to point out that it's backed by the taxpayer?) - it says it plans to look again at the claims it has received from customers in financial hardship, however it plans to reject those from other customers. She's about to update her main story: Bank charges ruling goes against consumers.

 

[Bennie-Mac]

I think it depends on your bank, as this is a policy they have rather than the result of any legislation:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/blog/2009/nov/24/bank-charges-ruling

Good stuff, thanks

 

[kylew]

in what possible way doesn't it? there isn't enough money in your account, yet you are trying to spend it, so you're trying to spend money you don't have.

Trying to and actually doing so are two different things.

Trying to is equal to going to the super market and forgetting your money.

If they blocked it because you don't have any money instead of allowing it so that they're able to charge you then people wouldn't be allowed to spend money they don't have and people like you would have nothing to complain about.

Not having enough money in a bank account also doesn't always equal "no money" as has already been mentioned, people can forget to transfer monies from other bank accounts.

Why people deserved to be charged £30 for such things is ridiculous.

How about shops now charge people when their card's declined at the till for various reasons?

 

[zootfloot]

one mum, one dad, two kids, fixed income that just about covers everything. thats the average working class family in england.

car breaks, money spent on clutch, car needed by mum for school runs and dad for work, not enough money for a bill, "charges please"

next month, pay bill money for month before, mum and dad working all hours so no room for extra income, funds still short due to paying off last months, without charges they could catch up over two or three months but nooooo,

not enough money in account to cover bills due to clutch breaking previous month and snowball effect "charges please"

and spiral.

too many of you are completely simplistic or just completely arrogant in an "im all right jack" way. im not sure which.

A very honest post in my opinion, and one which i suspect reflects a larger portion of the public than the "i have enough money available to me and have never had a bank charge ever" brigade.

I agree with the bank charges system, it is not fair to expect the bank system to give you free money, however the amount they charge for such things is massively extortionate.

I know families who now live in their overdraft due to certain circumstances and pay huge amounts of charges back each month, they cant get a loan to pay it off (or dont want to due to getting a loan to pay a loan) cant add to their mortgage because of those circumstances...its called a vicious circle and some of you would do well to spend a couple of months in those families shoes and find out just how hard life can really be.

 

[Stretch]

I do agree that the charge amounts are unfair and should be reduced, but I don't see it as unreasonable that there is some penalty.

I agree there should be a charge, but it should be just and proportionate.

 

[khimbar]

Good. Pleased about this.

 

[growse]

Trying to and actually doing so are two different things.

Trying to is equal to going to the super market and forgetting your money.

If they blocked it because you don't have any money instead of allowing it so that they're able to charge you then people wouldn't be allowed to spend money they don't have and people like you would have nothing to complain about.

Not having enough money in a bank account also doesn't always equal "no money" as has already been mentioned, people can forget to transfer monies from other bank accounts.

Why people deserved to be charged £30 for such things is ridiculous.

How about shops now charge people when their card's declined at the till for various reasons?

How about paying in cash?

A very honest post in my opinion, and one which i suspect reflects a larger portion of the public than the "i have enough money available to me and have never had a bank charge ever" brigade.

I agree with the bank charges system, it is not fair to expect the bank system to give you free money, however the amount they charge for such things is massively extortionate.

I know families who now live in their overdraft due to certain circumstances and pay huge amounts of charges back each month, they cant get a loan to pay it off (or dont want to due to getting a loan to pay a loan) cant add to their mortgage because of those circumstances...its called a vicious circle and some of you would do well to spend a couple of months in those families shoes and find out just how hard life can really be.

How many of those families have actually had a conversation with the bank about their circumstances and taken hard decisions to do without luxuries in their lives?

 

[khimbar]

one mum, one dad, two kids, fixed income that just about covers everything. thats the average working class family in england.

car breaks, money spent on clutch, car needed by mum for school runs and dad for work, not enough money for a bill, "charges please"

next month, pay bill money for month before, mum and dad working all hours so no room for extra income, funds still short due to paying off last months, without charges they could catch up over two or three months but nooooo,

not enough money in account to cover bills due to clutch breaking previous month and snowball effect "charges please"

and spiral.

too many of you are completely simplistic or just completely arrogant in an "im all right jack" way. im not sure which.

Then get an authorised overdraft and they won't be charged. Thats my understanding of it?

 

[kylew]

Again absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.

Oh, I see, the same way you didn't answer the question I asked too?

If you're talking about leaving DDs running, then there's plenty of reasons, as I and other have mentioned already.

"Forgot to transfer monies from another account".

It happens, it's nothing major costs the banks nothing and has no justification for then being the reason for a £30 fine.