Not unexepected?? Excuse me if I'm being exceptionally thick here, but... http://www.bankactiongroup.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1757 (hope that link works - if not, look in this same board right at the top: Announcement)

I knew I'd find some mention of this somewhere, if I just kept reading! In The Netherlands, the banks are permitted to charge interest only on the amount owed. Of course, they can and do impose punitive interest rates - figures like 20% on unauthorised overdraft, for instance. Still, even 20% (annual rate) on a few quid for a few days is virtually nothing. Even on a couple of hundred, it's still negligable if you only owed it to them for a week. They still make totally outrageous profits. They are also obliged to send you a statement every time any material transaction takes place on your account. I can't remember now how much is considered material, but the figure NLG 50 rings a bell, which was around 20 quid. This meant you didn't get big, nasty surprises as you do here. How did this come about? Simple: the government passed a law. Never mind messing about with OFT and guidelines and whatnot, just make it law! This was something else I was meaning to ask: if this is common in most Western European countries, then surely we could argue that English/UK banks have no justification for continuing their bloodsucking practices. Or how about taking His Toniness & Co to international court to force the issue? Incidentally, banks don't close for lunch there. The PostBank was always open on Saturday mornings aswell, although this is less important since the coming of ATMs; it was also an innovator of automated processing and up until about 15 years ago was still using a system of punchcards that doubled as 'cheques' (though not as we know them, Jim). Another possibly interesting Dutch fact is: all interest and costs connected with purchasing the home that is your main residence are tax deductable. Ok, now I'm getting 'homesick'. So I shall add that they do add a smallish amount to your tax bill for the benefit of not having to pay rent (don't ask me to explain why). And if you lose your job, they make you 'eat your house' before you can claim benefits. And they have a wealth tax - aarrgghh

(Holds hand up in the air) Ooh, Miss, I saw it! I saw GMTV! Howdja think I found you, honey? And what is the point of rhetorical questions? You got mentions and even a display of your website address. Well, ok: AN address, which led to a page saying that the forum had moved to here. 8)

Forgive me if this has already been dealt with somewhere on this site. Since I returned to England after twenty years living abroad (where banks are not allowed to do apply penalty charges the way they do here), I keep wondering about the legality of the banks just helping themselves to your account when they choose. If the bank feels they have a claim against me, they should send me an invoice and try to persuade me to pay it. It is obviously unfair to just take it and then act as if it's money you effectively took out of your own account. Of course, this is sanctioned by usage and that is always a weighty argument for continuing to get away with something, but does anyone here know if it's ever been challenged, through the courts? I would like to see a change in the law to prevent this. Let them put it in a separate account, where they can't keep charging repeat penalties on the penalty amounts. Is anyone lobbying for something similar?

The bank from seven years ago win because I didn't know. I may post the story in the appropriate forum but it's unlikely to be far different from hundreds of other posts. The credit card company is Capital One. I hesitate to name institutions until I have got my head around the issue of what constitutes defamatory statements. I'm a cautious type. Love the signature - here's to lots of painful toes :twisted:

I'm new and I would just like to say: yes, I have read the FAQs. I have also explored the library a little and read a number of posts from various forums. Great forum site, this... wish I'd found it a year or too sooner as the biggest hit I took from the bank was around seven years ago (. Oh well. Onwards and upwards, eh? It won't stop me from going after other charges, more recently imposed. The existence of this forum, and the action group (as well as, possibly, other groups) goes some way to explaining something I had found perplexing in the past: the question of why my credit card company, when challenged, voluntarily gave back half of the punitive charges they had been piling up for months. Now I believe they have this as standard policy in place; when things suddenly get a lot easier for a low-income person, that person is far less likely to go to the CAB or seek guidance elsewhere and consequently far less likely to find out he or she can probably get the whole lot back. Perhaps this post should have been in the General forum... please move it if that's so, with my apologies.