Suggestion for a 'TRUE' service

[dave&sueb]

Hi All, hopeI'm posting correctly here.

 

I have a suggestion for a 'TRUE' service that I think most of us would happily pay for.

 

Like many, I have had occasions when a clash of DD payments have arrived for processing on the same day and the total has exceeded available funds. The problem is, that in this situation, the payment refusal system seems to be entirely arbitrary and, like many, my most important payment, my Mortgage, has been the one that sufferd.

 

It would be great to see a system of prioritising where the customer can prioritise payments from their account. This would leave the least important of our payments unpaid and alleviate a lot of the worry over missing the important ones.

 

Ok, so the agreement would have to be that a charge of some description would have to be made if it was the prioritised payment that took you over a limit, but at least it's worth the fee or charge (not withstanding that the fee should reprsent the true costs to the bank of course) for the peace of mind.

 

I would much rather pay a fee for allowing my mortgage payment than bouncing it in favour of a magazine subscription and still pay a fee as well as having to explain and suffer a charge from my mortgage company as well.

 

This type of arrangement would be easy for the banks to manage with their systems and would improve customer relations etc...etc..

[dave&sueb]

How naive of me........the decision on which to bounce is not arbitrary at all.....they would simply bounce the one that gained them the most charges and interest...DUHHHHH

[Guest NATTIE]

Wrong, the likelyhood is that the lowest amount is paid and the larger amount is returned unpaid. Going back to a TRUE service, it is one where the customers have faith and trust in their bank to provide not only a service but a true cost for everything. We pay for what we use on an account and not be a pawn to subsidise anyone. We do get good service but the bank dictate good and bad people and that is wrong TODAY, let's hope tomorrow is better- we have to hope:D

[barracad]

Wrong, the likelyhood is that the lowest amount is paid and the larger amount is returned unpaid.

 

Actually, a lot of banks pay the larger payments first.

 

The reason? More smaller payments will then be bounced, meaning they can add on more charges, rather than just one charge for the one large payment which would bounce.

[Bookworm]

Beat me to that answer, Barracad!

 

Dave&sueb, there is just such a system, and it doesn't cost anything: It's called Standing Orders, and allows YOU to say what goes out when and how much from your account. And if you bank online, you can shuffle payments, or delay, or alter payments, so that you can organise your finances in a way that suits you with no other intervention. I can not recommend it highly enough to anyone who wants to take back the control of their finances.

[121o121]

Agreed Bookworm.

 

The only direct debits on my account are ones that won't accept any other form of payment.

 

All my utility bills, council tax, mobile phone & credit cards are paid through internet banking. And if I know I won't have enough money in my account to pay a direct debit, i make sure the direct debit is cancelled the day before so it can't leave my account. That way I don't get charged.

 

Ring them up the next day and they set it back up for me.

[Guest NATTIE]

And remember you can cancel Direct Debits and reinstate them within 90 days of cancelling them as well.

[dave&sueb]

The advice re: standing orders is all very well when the amount doesn't change.

 

All the banter about the account management methods we can all use is fine but presupposes we all have the time to commit to such things. I myself would love to have the time but just don't have, I struggle to find the time to input into this forum which is probably why my claim has taken almost 6 months already.

 

I simply believe, perhaps naively, that the banks should act with mutual best interest and generate trust in them by being helpful.

[Bookworm]

Banter? Banter implies that it is not a serious suggestion. It is deadly serious, and pre-supposes nothing. You, on the other hand, are pre-supposing that people suggesting this have plenty of time. I do now, yes, but I didn't when I started doing my finances that way. I was working an average 60 hours a week, and raising a family at the same time. I made the time all the same.

 

It is not a question of "having the time to commit to such things", it is a question of trying to have control of your finances. Maybe if you did, you wouldn't have to be on this forum to reclaim your charges.

 

Yes, I do think you are being naive if you think that there is any chance that the banks would have anything but their own profits in mind.

 

Financial control is down to us. Once you realise that the banks are there to make as much money as they can out of us, maybe you will find the time to take back that control from them. If not, you'll be back here in 6 months, 1 year down the line with more charges to be reclaimed.

 

Personally, I'd rather not incur the charges in the first place by making the time than letting the bank ride roughshod over me ever again, and then devoting months into getting my charges back. Far less stressful for starters.

 

Of course, the decision is yours. Hopefully, at some point, the penny will drop and you'll get tired of being treated like a second class citizen by the very institution you should be able to trust and can't. But it is totally up to you.

 

Oh, and changing amounts are not a problem. Really not. You get your bill, you go online, you change the amount. It takes minutes. Against the £30 odd quid the banks will charge you for paying/bouncing your d/d, this could work out at the best value for your time you've ever had. ;-)

[dave&sueb]

Banter was the wrong word to use....in fact my entire post was hurried and ill thought out.

 

The concept of finding time is wonderful, however, since being made redundant for the 5th time in 6 years, I have started a business which, after a year of complete frugality, is beginning to bear fruit.

 

This has meant 20 hour days, 7 days a week....unhealthy, I know! but necessary. This is the main reason for finding it difficult to find time. (not to mention having no internet for some time and having to watch the cost of every phone call. Even as I speak, I have done 14 hours without lunch and now have to sit up through the night to finish a design job. It's my choice and I am not begging sympathy....not my style. Just pointing out that sometimes, other things have to take priority for the good of the future.

 

I am well aware, on this subject, how important it is to manage finances well and that my financial fate with regard to these thieves can only rest in my hands and believe me, I will not allow the little 888***8*s to take me again.

[photoman]

I think a "TRUE" service the Banks could provide, that would benfit all could be as such:

1/ You request that the Bank monitors certain Payments for you.

2/ Your Bank notices that one of these, a Standing order (for example your Mortgage) was due on X date, and that you do not have sufficient funds to cover it.

3/ They call, email or write to you to inform you of this, and ask if you could you make a deposit to cover this in advance.

4/ In addition, they inform you, that as they will be charging you X amount for the "service" of having dealt with this and forewarned you.

5/ This way, you don't have the inconvenience and additional costs incurred by missing certain payments, or any defaults registered.

 

THIS, would be a TRUE service, that many would not mind paying for ? Rather than a computerised letter AFTER the event to inform you that a payment has been returned.

The Banks would be happy because they would have financially gained, you would be happy because you would have not missed an important payment with the attendant extra work, costs or Defaults. And the recipient of the payment be be happy because they had got their money.

 

A TRUE SERVICE !!!