Passing on the message

[missy]

Hi

 

I found a website that lists all the uk newspapers and I am working through them to extract the email addresses of the editors.

 

http://www.wrx.zen.co.uk/britnews.htm

 

My intention is to send an email once a week to the papers in the hope that our story will be picked up more than it is now. I see a lot of members working on different ways to advertise this site and are being very successful, like the "send this email to all your friends".

 

What do you all think of this idea? Does anyone have any suggestions for possible content and should the content change every week should it stay the same (stuck record being really annoying but gets attention.)

 

regards

[richardc]

Great! Keep us posted,

[Spiceskull]

Hi Missy,

 

It's a great idea, and people do have to do these things. I'm going to try a new scattergun approach tomorrow, based on my adventures today. However, my own personal view is that somewhere, somehow, there is an unwritten gagging order on the media...

 

That does not mean to say that you should give up - some sub-editor might get your message, take it to print, and realise the error too late...this is what I think we need...

 

Keep it up, as no news is bad news!!!

[missy]

Thanks for the words of support. Does anyone have any ideas for the content of the email???

[Spiceskull]

I could let you have a collage of what I sent to my MP...it might not be in the right context, but it is very 'sit up and listen...'

[JamesBooker]

. However, my own personal view is that somewhere, somehow, there is an unwritten gagging order on the media...

 

I think that's a bit paranoid as there's been loads of coverage about this in the media from local to national papers, radio and TV news. As soon as there's another development in the story such as bailiffs being sent into a bank or the OFT finally making their statement it will be back in the headlines.

[Spiceskull]

Yes - it was a bit paranoid, and today's daily mail article proves the point...how can the issue not get further coverage now?

[Krystyna]

Not got the Daily mail what did it say??

 

Krystyna

[paulson1985]

the article says

the oft are expected to order the banks to cut thier charges on credit cards to £15 or £10. for gouing over the limit they concluded the charges are unfair under

the u.t.c.c.r.

 

the consummer group which has said these bank charges are illegal and unenforceable,

 

it also says the move by the oft comes as individuals are using the same law to win refunds.

 

 

my comment,

why £25 is seen to be a penalty but £15 isnt is a mystery to me.

[JamesBooker]

Daily Mail Saturday April 1st 2006

 

BANKS MUST STOP £750m CREDIT AND OVERDRAFT RIP-OFF

By Sean Poulter

Consumer Affairs Correspondent

 

The big banks are to be ordered to slash charges on credit cards and overdrafts in a move that will end a rip-off totalling more than £750 million a year.

 

The Office of Fair Trading has decided the charges, which run from £20 to £39 at a time, amount to an unfair penalty on millions of Britons.

 

The watchdog is expected to introduce a cap whcih could bring them down to £15 or even £10.

 

The OFT has concluded that the charges are unfair under the Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, coupled with case law dating back to 1914.

 

These state that charges must be proportionate rather than used as a penalty to punish delinquent customers or a ruse to boost profits.

 

The OFT has been spurred into action by complaints from angry consumers and the fact that finance giants have imposed dramatic increases in these charges.

 

Over the last two years, credit card late payment fees and those covering overdrafts and bounced cheques have gone up by 40%. However, it appears the tide of rising charges is finally about to be turned.

 

City analysts estimate the cap on fees would cost RBS-Natwest, Barclays, Lloyds-TSB, HSBC and Halifax-Bank of Scotland a total of £750million if it is set at £15, £1.2billion at £10 and £1.65billion at £5. Clare Whyley, of the National Consumer Council, described the current charges as 'completely unreasonable'.

 

She said: 'They are a penalty and a punishment, rather than a true reflection of the bank's costs. That is not acceptable.

 

'These charges should have come down because of the increased automation in the banking system, but in fact they have gone the other way. We would be really pleased to see a system where charges are a true reflection of costs.'

 

Miss Whyley said the big five banks, which delivered record profits of more than £31billion last year, are not in a position to plead poverty. She added: 'The charges hit people when they are at their most vulnerable. Someone might only go £1 overdrawn, but they are then hit with a fee of more than £30.'

 

Consumer group Which? said: 'The reality is that these bank charges are illegal and unenforceable.'

 

It is to name and shame high-charging banks by slapping 'Asbos' - Anti-Social Banking Orders - on the worst offenders and claimed the banks are 'scared to death' at the prospect of having to cut charges.

 

The move by the OFT comes as individuals are using the same law to win refunds totalling thousands of pounds at time.

 

The big banks are on the back foot. Over the last few months they have been offering refunds to angry customers rather than attempting to defend the punishing charges in the courts.

 

The OFT has been investigating the rip-off charges for 18 months. It will announce a final verdict on Wednesday with a view to forcing the banks to slash fees, either through the courts or the Competition Commission. The process could take anything from a few months to a year.

 

The banks have rejected claims that charges are 'excessive'. They say they reflect costs and can be easily avoided if customers manage their accounts properly. They have threatened to challenge any cap in the courts.

 

Insiders suggest they will attempt to introduce other charges, such as an annual fee on credit cards or higher interest rates, to cover any reduction in penalty fees.

[Spiceskull]

I do think that a half-page article, on page 2 of the Daily Mail must now convince the banks that the cat is out of the bag...I wonder how they are going to manage coverage in light of this article which was, after all, pretty scathing and contemptuous of their cavalier attitude to customers.

[Krystyna]

Thanks to everyone who let me know what it said. I would like to put them in bag and give them a good shaking !!! Swines

[Bookworm]

I do think that a half-page article, on page 2 of the Daily Mail must now convince the banks that the cat is out of the bag...I wonder how they are going to manage coverage in light of this article which was, after all, pretty scathing and contemptuous of their cavalier attitude to customers.

 

Which is all the more astonishing considering it was from the Mail.

[Spiceskull]

Nothing is quite so effective for a long drawn out campaign as getting the NIMBY's in on the action (no offence to any Daily Mail readers...)

[Spiceskull]

Hi Missy,

 

Not sure how far you got with contacting the papers, but today I sent an email regarding bank charges to the following:

 

Daily Telegraph: dtletters@telegraph.co.uk

Sunday Telegraph: stletters@telegraph.co.uk

The Times: letters@thetimes.co.uk

The Sunday Times: letters@sunday-times.co.uk

The Independent: letters@independent.co.uk

The Daily Mail: letters@dailymail.co.uk

The Mail On Sunday: letters@mailonsunday.co.uk

The Guardian: letters@guardian.co.uk

 

It was generic, intended really to raise awareness of the issue, and as such I did not make specific mention of BAG. However, should I receive feedback I will be pointing them in the direction of the mods and administrators.

[Spiceskull]

***An Update***

 

Not much I'm afraid, but a response to an email I sent to the Sunday Times:

Dear Mr Skull,

Thank you for your letter. I have passed on a copy for the information of the Money Editor.

[fallen404]

I'd be interested to see what kind of reaction the Times actually has to it, if they do an article on it of some sort, since I'd imagine a large-ish proportion of banking higher-ups read it.

[Spiceskull]

I'd be interested to see what kind of reaction the Times actually has to it, if they do an article on it of some sort, since I'd imagine a large-ish proportion of banking higher-ups read it.

Not so sure of that - The Times and The Sun are both Murdoch papers. However, as The Sun seems to be relishing in WhizzKids claim, I don't see how they will have a problem with cross-paper reporting. The story in The Sun was sensationalist, but actually getting the bailiffs in would certainly make good reading in The Times...and they would end up with eggy faces if they did not put a serious side to the story. Let's follow Chris's thread in both papers and see what happens.

[fallen404]

This is true, but it's important to remember the social disparity between Times readers and Sun readers. (Insert long series of disparaging comments about Sun readers' political leanings, literacy, numeracy and personal grooming habits here). I'm pretty sure that the Times would report the action, it will probably be a lot more reserved in it's opinions, or be negative. A lot more Times readers are likely to have investments; they'll want to know what effect our actions will have on their money.

[Lusky]

I e-mailed my local rag last week explaining my intention to take legal action against LTSB if they do not refund illegal charges and would this be of interest to them? ( LTSB have 2 large offices and a huge presence in the town where I live).

 

The paper rang me today for details, I explained that I awaiting information requested under DPA letter dated 6th April. The reporter asked me to call her back when I have this info. I also gave her details of this site and how it has inspired me.

 

I would hazard a guess that this NOT the sort of publicity that LTSB or any of the other banks want so really can't wait to get my DPA info so I can report back to them. It will be soooo interesting to see how LTSB will comment if asked!

 

Just feel it is my duty to raise community awareness lol.

 

Gave the reporter this website address for info.

[Spiceskull]

I agree completely - and it will be interesting to see what balancing measures they apply when reporting the story in both papers. I'm not going to get into the demographic differences between readers of the two...we're ALL here for justice. I just hope that my letter gets printed...

[dave]

Incidently, I will be starting up a CAG newsletter soon - maybe we could convince the editors to sign up - in case anything 'interesting' happens that they might find newsworthy.

 

You can sign up, here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/newsletter.php

 

Although it is a bit buggy and will let you enter bad email addresses - you just won't recieve the activation email if it is a wrong one.

 

PS. Please bear in mind that the site is still a WIP, so some of the links won't work and there will be unpredictable results (especially if you don't use the Firefox web browser).

[Spiceskull]

Dave,

 

I can't believe you are missing a trick here: http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates/homepage

 

This should earn some commission for BAG, but even if you don't want the commission, a little 'Spread Firefox' banner would not go amiss (my favourites are towards the bottom of the page...)

[dave]

Soon, we will be able to earn a commission - and about time too, it's starting to hurt the pockets.

[Overdrawn]

Newsletter = FAB idea

 

Just signed up now, thanks Dave x