ITV - 'Tonight' programme - Friday 23 Feb 8.00 pm

[Spiceskull]

The OFT can state it's recommendations or internal working levels ie £12 but this IS NOT THE LAW!!

This is pretty much what the OFT said in their April 5th statement last year:

What costs were in the reasonable contemplation of the consumer would be a question for the court to decide.

 

Please be aware that only a court can decide whether a term is unfair and what is stated here is just our view.

I understand that what the banks are scared of is a Judge asking for a disclosure of a bank's internal cost structure in order that he/she can set a fair precedent in a money claim case.

This is exactly what the banks are scared of, especially as they refused to answer such questions to the commons select committee...still, someone, somewhere, someday will strike it lucky, or else the banks will miss their footing, and find that this disclosure has been ordered when they were not looking...

[last in]

What WOULD people prefer though if they had to choose between the best of a bad lot - Monthly Fees (but for what?) or continuance of charges, but at a realistic transparent level.

 

I personally, if I had to choose, would go for the lower charges, if they were capped at £2.50 as has been suggested for a maintenance charge, £4.50 for cheques bouncing.

 

Obviously, I'd prefer it to be £0. Maybe, since onlinebanking seems to be the norm these days, do it all by E-Mail, then it would be next to nothing.

 

Likewise, if it came to a choice I would prefer to pay reasonable, fairly and transparently worked out charges rather than pay for banking via monthly fee.

 

Considering some of the recent developments in the bank charges world - LOADS of media coverage over the past couple of weeks including a fantastically shouty Daily Mail front page , a judge ordering one bank's defence to be struck out etc. - I wonder whether the banks will soon band together to try and come up with a way of putting a stop to people reclaiming? Obviously nothing can change the fact that past charges have been unlawful, and present charges are likely to remain so given banks' rampant profiteering, but they are very slippery fellows...what do you guys think?

[Spiceskull]

I wonder whether the banks will soon band together to try and come up with a way of putting a stop to people reclaiming?

Oooohhh!!! YES PLEASE!!! Then they can be done not only for profiteering, but also for operating a cartel, something that the OFT takes seriously, and the MMC takes VERY VERY seriously...that would really be a bad move by the banks...which means they are likely to make it...

[callingcard]

Yes, the OFT would alert the Competition Commision if the banks got together in a cartel. I don't think there is a remote possibilty that they would.

[daisy_bumbleroot]

I think that if the banks introduce monthly current account fees for ALL customers there might be a big back lash and it will become a bigger issue than penalty charge reclaiming.

Backlash schmacklash.

 

If the bank needs to charge for "services" then they shold charge one and all. Why should I pay for someone else's bank services just because Ive gone overdrawn? The argument that us lot sholdnt go overdrawn and its our own fault has nothing to do with it. People can complain all they like about this, its two different issues altogether.

[kennyh]

Pleased to see DollyDayDream's post #35, cos if the Nationwide are seeking to delay things pending OFT deliberation they'd better take on board the OFT's contention that ERCs are a penalty!!(Have yer cake and eat it springs to mind).

Also it definitely seems as though young Martin Lewis is a little bedazzled by all the media attention (CrispDust #38 and callingcard#49 refer). Did anyone see the BBC Breakfast interview with one of their 'in house' specialists where Dermott (in addressing the current move to reclaim differentials on motgage exit fees) then described ERCs as 'penalties' and the specialist said "Yeh - but they're all right"!!

When are they going to get their heads from where the sun don't shine?

[Bookworm]

For info:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/70359-about-oft-impending-report.html#post605007

 

(I got tired of typing the same thing over and over again, lol)

[naughtyemit]

People, it is really very simple.

1. Trevor McDoughnut and his cronies make a living sensationalising things they know next to nothing about, giving an accurate, level portrayal of the facts rarely factors into their planning at all.

2. Bank charges as we all know are artificially inflated for the benefit of shareholders. All this garbage about annual fees for bank accounts etc is never going to happen. ONe of the banks will offer fee free banking and then the fight for customers will start again.

3. The OFT are paid by the government who take bungs for peerages, surely not above a backhander from the chairman of moneybags bank directors.

4. Nationwide can write their letters in an attempt to stall you, the claims procedure for the Courts is fixed in stone, if you stand firm by your deadlines, they will throw money at you before you get them into Court and that is a fact.

 

5. Stop worrying, follow the advice on this website and get your money back.