RBS/Natwest slash charges

[div0]

Because we're their customers. They should change what they do to best serve us, just like any business.

But it ends up in a ridiculous situation.

As I said in my post above. I don't want my bank to block my direct debits, just so I can't go overdrawn.

Sure, it's good that I don't get fined by my bank in that instance.

But what if my payment (which they now blocked) results in an even higher penalty from whoever it was due to be paid to? How are the bank expected to decide when it is in my best interest to have a payment prevented?

 

[div0]

There is no NEED for banks to charge. People should manage their money, but you 'holier than thou brigade' need to remember that sometimes mistakes and emergencies happen.

The need is that if there weren't any charges then everyone would just live in an infinite amount of debt.

As I said before - feel free to debate the size of the charges, but it makes no sense to say that there shouldn't be some form of penalty for being overdrawn.

 

[thecremeegg]

But it ends up in a ridiculous situation.

As I said in my post above. I don't want my bank to block my direct debits, just so I can't go overdrawn.

Sure, it's good that I don't get fined by my bank in that instance.

But what if my payment (which they now blocked) results in an even higher penalty from whoever it was due to be paid to? How are the bank expected to decide when it is in my best interest to have a payment prevented?

Well have an arrangement with the bank then, you tell them if you want them to block your payments or whether you want them to let you use your overdraft. And for the people saying "manage your money better and you wont get charged" are obviously perfect and have never had an unexpected bill or made a mistake

 

[div0]

Well have an arrangement with the bank then, you tell them if you want them to block your payments or whether you want them to let you use your overdraft. And for the people saying "manage your money better and you wont get charged" are obviously perfect and have never had an unexpected bill or made a mistake

Or, even better - just take responsibility for yourself?

The whole concept of a bank account is meant to be that you are in credit. You can arrange an overdraft (for which you won't be charged) so that if you have an unexpected bill, or make a mistake, then you have a 'buffer' before you pay any penalty.

The problem only arrises, when people treat the 'buffer' like it's money they should be spending as it it was their own.

 

[MarcLister]

Well it's good news in general, but then I suppose they've decided to settle on more reasonable fees in order to stop the courts deciding against them completely on the charge front.

My thoughts exactly when I opened this thread. That and they can tell the courts that they've actually dropped their charges, wouldn't matter how much, but they've actively dropped their charges.

 

[Surfer]

My thoughts exactly when I opened this thread. That and they can tell the courts that they've actually dropped their charges, wouldn't matter how much, but they've actively dropped their charges.

Yep - knew this day would eventually come. A small victory for the customer i guess.

It will delay them being forthcoming about the *actual* costs involved but wont prevent it eventually.

With regard to the various comments and accusations flying around this thread. The only thing that has any real relevance is whether the charges are lawful or unlawful. Whether someone can manage their money properly or not or anything else are secondary and not central to the argument.

I have an apointment tmw with my manager as well. I'll have to speak to him about this

 

[Biohazard]

Only if you're bad enough with money to get charged in the first place. It's not an issue for most people.

Not the case, there can be bank computer error (or bank system antiquity more to the point) or third party mistakes.

I love how snotty people round here get with bank charges, and 'manage your money'. Some people do, and still get these leveled at them occasionally. They are a pest and an unnecessary extortion.

I already pay for one of my current accounts so I don't care much with regards to the concern over free banking, I actually benefit from it just now.

I cannot see there ever being a point where state owned banks will remove free banking fascilities. If people didn't do something over that, we deserve all we get.

 

[mattheman]

My thoughts exactly when I opened this thread. That and they can tell the courts that they've actually dropped their charges, wouldn't matter how much, but they've actively dropped their charges.

The charges would just rise later on, banks should block transactions.

 

[MarcLister]

The charges would just rise later on, banks should block transactions.

Why would the charges rise later on?

And block what transactions?

 

[growse]

Not the case, there can be bank computer error (or bank system antiquity more to the point) or third party mistakes.

I love how snotty people round here get with bank charges, and 'manage your money'. Some people do, and still get these leveled at them occasionally. They are a pest and an unnecessary extortion.

I already pay for one of my current accounts so I don't care much with regards to the concern over free banking, I actually benefit from it just now.

I cannot see there ever being a point where state owned banks will remove free banking fascilities. If people didn't do something over that, we deserve all we get.

I'd far rather have banking services at their current pricing levels and the small incovenience of getting mistakes sorted out than the banks cut their overdraft fees and charge me more for everything else.

Re-reading that, I'm basically saying "I'd rather the bank charged other people more for services that I don't use and me less for services that I do use". Might seem selfish, but meh. If the banks started to charge £1000 for people going over their limits so that I can have cheaper loans, more power to them.