2 minds

[Tinkerbelle]

I know what you mean.

 

I want insider info..not patronising comments

[EricTheRed]

2 minds - half a brain. The law is the law.

 

Your plumbing analogy is pathetic it's not as though he had breached any contract with you is it. Now get back to work as you obviously busy.

[bram stoker]

2 minds - half a brain. Now get back to work as you're obviously busy.

Classic!!

[Overdrawn]

2 minds - half a brain. The law is the law.

 

Your plumbing analogy is pathetic it's not as though he had breached any contract with you is it. Now get back to work as you obviously busy.

 

Simple, precise and straight to the point

[insomniac]

everything is dispraportionate thats how people earn money, it doesnt cost a plumber £35 an hour to fix ur pipes, but its what they charge and you agree to it... 6 years later are you gonna go back to him and get ur money back?

 

 

I cannot see any similarity between a plumber and bank making charges.

 

The Plumber sets his hourly rate and if you wish to hire him you pay him, he does not come round and then demand that because he couldn't fit the washer onto your pipes as they are a different size he will now issue you a £25 Charge regardless of what you say.

 

Also the plumber is "manual working" the main point with charges is that the banks computer cannot send the payment due to lack of funds, this probably takes milli-seconds yet they have to right to issue a £25 charge?

 

If someone had to stop the whole computer system cycle and then manually ammend the records etc and then handwrite a letter and send it out, then possibily the charges would be more acceptable, but having worked in a bank before I know that this just does not happen and charges are all profit.

 

The point is the charges are way over priced.

 

Halifax charge £39 for a bounced DD, thats almost a days wages for me and probably most of their staff, so are we saying that it takes 1 person 1 working day to solve the problem my bounced DD has caused the Halifax?

[EricTheRed]

Insomniac you have nailed it right on the head. What 2 minds does not understand is that the law is the law and there is clearly established case law backed up by recent consumer legislation that make the claims lawful. What this has to do with plumbers is beyond me. A rather strange analogy don’t you think? There is no similarity between the service offered by a plumber and a bank charge. Common sense and logical reasoning are qualities that our friend doesn’t seem to have been blessed with. His thought pattern does not seem to be of this world. I suppose that’s the difficulty of having 2 minds.

[kralc]

2 minds you should be aware that the banking industry thrives on people not running their accounts responsibly these people earn them millions each year and because of their nature are less likely to ask for refunds. I can remember when if you went to an ATM and you only had £3.00 it would not let you draw £5.00 then somebody thought up the wonderfull term RISK ASSESSMENT and bingo the banks earn more millions. Unauthorised overdraft my backside the software authorises it. Why are people so dumb?

[crusty git]

. By deliberately levying unlawful charges, you have excluded yourselves from the Statute of Limitations.

Is'nt there an implication here Seminole that we can go back beyond 6 years?

 

J

[Roy Bonner]

Hi guys-n-gals, I'm somewhat new to this forum business, in fact this is my first ever post to such a thing. In fact I'm what is colloquially referred to as a silver surfer, though I have been a computer technician for over 35 years. Anyway, the foregoing is by way of background to apologise for any gaffes I may make/have made.

The point is that I came to this site first time the day before yesterday, and have been avidly trawling the forums ever since, I have already requested statements back to 2001, and am looking forward to a little of what was good for the goose. Since reading through the whole 11 pages of this thread, it occurs to me that it is quite possible that if 2 minds, was to accept that the bank's system of charges were indeed unlawful, (Which it seems they are), then it follows that a large part of 2 mind's job is also unlawful, and that 2 minds has caused an awful lot of unlawful grief for a lot of people. Personally, I would noy be able to live with myself in that situation, and would at the very least, have to quit that particular job.

It seems that 2 minds is an intelligent and rational person in most ways, but when it comes to the core fact that the banks, are acting unlawfully, (and therefore 2mind's position is also of questionable lawfulness), then intelligence and rationality seem to depart at great speed, and are replaced with numerous specious examples of plumbers and parking fines. It occurs to me that this person is far too intelligent to believe any of the guff she put forward in defence. It was so obviously in totally different categories to the case in point, that my great grandson would have laughed it out of contention.

I can only assume therefore, that 2 minds, is persistantly trying to convince herself that the banks are doing no wrong, an attempt which is logically doomed to failure, and I would suggest that she considers a career change and some councilling before the schizophrenia mentioned earlier in the thread becomes less of a pun than the real thing.

(This is a serious warning/suggestion, and I intend no slur to any person or persons who may or may not read this post)

[joneshousehold]

Here, here. (I always thought 2 minds was a bloke but your viewpoint does put a whole new slant on the thread. A woman eh - interesting!)

 

Actually an interesting fact. 2 minds joined the forum on 23 April and hasn't been back here since 27 April. Do you think he/she left because he/she couldn't win the intellectual argument?

[Roy Bonner]

Here, here. (I always thought 2 minds was a bloke but your viewpoint does put a whole new slant on the thread. A woman eh - interesting!)

 

I may well be wrong here, my short term memory is becoming increasingly unreliable, however, I did seem to recall that at least twice during my perusal of the thread, 2 minds had been refered to by a feminine pronoun. This of course may mean nothing even if my memory is not at fault

 

Actually an interesting fact. 2 minds joined the forum on 23 April and hasn't been back here since 27 April. Do you think he/she left because he/she couldn't win the intellectual argument?

 

I suspect that if my analysis of that person was anywhere near correct, that he / she would have been intellectually aware of the impossibility of winning, and at the same time, equally aware of the psychological dangers inherant in losing. So an inherantly unstable situation existed. One can only hope he/she managed to resolve it without too much problem.

[joneshousehold]

My mental image of him/her now is of something approaching Kryton from Red Dwarf when he was trying to say smeg head. 2 minds is trying to say lawful but keeps putting an 'un' in front!!! Perhaps he/she has been transferred in the banking equivalent of a sideways move off the coal face.

[Roy Bonner]

As a Red Dwarf fan from way back, I must confess a great liking for the imagery invoked. I suppose however, we are getting a trifle off-topic?

[joneshousehold]

Ah well, yes you are right and I apologise for going off topic before I get told off.

 

Still the thought is very amusing so thanks for that!

[fransuzette]

Just been reading up on all of this. I agree with you all, except 2 minds (sorry!). I have come across something that concerns me-that banks are supposed to give you 14 days notice before they charge you?? Well I have been with the Natwest for 10 years and I have NEVER had a letter pre warning me of charges, they just automatically get taken the instance a dd/so/chq goes over! I guess this is incorrect??

 

Well I am so gonna take the Bar Stewards, (without swearing), to court. Bring it on, bloody sick of not being able to afford one bill after another because £100s of bank charges that go on and on!

 

Fight for the people I say!! ***** the banks! (no offense to anyone working in a bank, having a go at the fat cats!) (MOD - Language please!!)

 

xxxxxxx

[SurlyBonds]

...snip...

everything is dispraportionate thats how people earn money, it doesnt cost a plumber £35 an hour to fix ur pipes, but its what they charge and you agree to it... 6 years later are you gonna go back to him and get ur money back?

 

Good luck to any people claiming, that really haven't just spanked money they dont have

 

There's a massive difference netween the plumber analogy and banks ripping people off, and I am surprised that someone who works for a bank can come out with such a statement.

 

When you pay a plumber an agreed price, you are agreeing to his skill and knowledge in doing the job properly, safely and assured for workmanship. However, if he fudges up, you sill have the right to redress. The plumber is actually taking time to do the job, which prevents him from gaining money elsewhere - you are paying for a specialised skill, and at a resonably proportionate level of remuneration in terms of what is actually being used.

 

The banks however, have huge computer systems that churn out pre-templated letters, that the bank manager doesn't even sign (they're scanned signatures embedded on the letter), and the whole process, including 1 sheet of recycled A4, one recycled envelope and a postal franking fee (they don't even need someone to stick stamps on) costs no more than 47p.

 

By the way, before you carp on about "what to fox do know", I own an IT company that project manages these sorts of systems, so I do know ....very much, thank you.

 

A returned Direct Debit is a milliseconds electronic message between two computer systems, that costs about 0.0000007p in processing time, if you really want to divide it out for an average bank.

 

In the meantime, the bank is ALSO charging interest, which is, I believe, fair (as long as it's at a reasonable rate...maybe base + a few percent), so they are getting two bites of the same cherry. That is, after all, how banks make money... they lend it, and charge interest, or they use my credit balance each night to play the markets, or hold up my incoming cheques for a few days to earn their own money on them (LloydsTSB, now, excepted).

 

They do NOT, repeat NOT, need to be so goddamn greedy (which is what it's all about) by charging anything like £30+ (in most cases) for the automated system to trigger the automated print centre to churn out a letter. Also, considering that this country has had messaging phones and email for many years, the banks have not adopted this technology to let customers know via these considerably less expensive mediums.

 

Instead, they have stuck to the archaic ritual of pretending to hand-write a letter, and then try and justify such extortionate costs. At the cost of some banks, it would be cheaper to hire a Sistene monk to hand-write in the finest calligraphy upon the finest goatskin-parchment!

 

Finally, the very last term and condition on every Bank's Ts & Cs is that they will be subject to English Law. And English Law (both the UTCC and Case Law), has spoken on that front...so why do the banks think they are above that Law?

 

Why? I'll tell you why. They think that becuase they are so big and powerful, they will frighten the little man in the street with this word 'Law', because the common perception is that Courts are costly, confusing, and corruptable.

 

However, as more and more successful cases flow through this and other media outlets, the truth is actually quite different. Remember, in a civil claim, the Claimant has to merely prove "on the balance of evidence", NOT "beyond all reasonable doubt".

 

In the meantime, I'm awaiting NatWest to reply as to how they maanged to turn a £14k overdraft (within an agreed 18k limit) into just under £50,000 and put the account in default at their own whim.

 

I'll let you know what happens...

[bram stoker]

Wow, this is an old thread. He was a troll. Don't bite!!