Do you trust the banks anymore? A new scam?

[blank]

I haven't trusted banks since a "financial advisor" tried to tell me one account was better than another as the rate was X.10% rather than X.1%.

[skip_1]

fido said:

skip_1 said:

Now we have state-owned banks then surely they couldn't be allowed to charge for overdrafts etc.?

Yes, so that they can continue making a profit for their new shareholders (be that the state or otherwise).

Edited by fido on Saturday 28th March 13:17

That is what I was getting at. I wonder if they would re-invest that money somewhere sensible

Thanks for not jumping down my throat like those above!

[Dare2Fail]

skip_1 said:

fido said:

skip_1 said:

Now we have state-owned banks then surely they couldn't be allowed to charge for overdrafts etc.?

Yes, so that they can continue making a profit for their new shareholders (be that the state or otherwise).

Edited by fido on Saturday 28th March 13:17

That is what I was getting at. I wonder if they would re-invest that money somewhere sensible

Thanks for not jumping down my throat like those above!

Sorry if you felt I was jumping down your throat, I clearly didn't get the point that you were trying to make. To be honest though, I still don't get it. When you say 're-invest that money', what money are you getting at? The only impact I can see of your suggestion would be the banks getting less income as they wouldn't be able to charge.

[Pints]

blank said:

I haven't trusted banks since a "financial advisor" tried to tell me one account was better than another as the rate was X.10% rather than X.1%.

[FarleyRusk]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Did you actually read the article before starting this especially pointless rant?
Excess charges apply to unauthorised overdrafts. Sounds fair to me. If you don't want to get stung don't borrow money without the lender's permission. Quite easy really

[skip_1]

Dare2Fail said:

skip_1 said:

fido said:

skip_1 said:

Now we have state-owned banks then surely they couldn't be allowed to charge for overdrafts etc.?

Yes, so that they can continue making a profit for their new shareholders (be that the state or otherwise).

Edited by fido on Saturday 28th March 13:17

That is what I was getting at. I wonder if they would re-invest that money somewhere sensible

Thanks for not jumping down my throat like those above!

Sorry if you felt I was jumping down your throat, I clearly didn't get the point that you were trying to make. To be honest though, I still don't get it. When you say 're-invest that money', what money are you getting at? The only impact I can see of your suggestion would be the banks getting less income as they wouldn't be able to charge.

Don't think I worded that too well. I guess i'm just miffed that the state-owned banks should be run as 'for profit' organisations, any profit should go back into the treasury for use on state spending. IMO of course.

[Jonny_]

And here we have the crux of the world's financial problems.

If you can't afford it, DON'T F*CKING SPEND IT.

And by "Afford" I don't mean the "I've got a grand in the bank, I'll buy a plasma TV" mantra of the terminally stupid

I mean "I've got a grand in the bank, but between now and next pay day I've got x coming out for the mortgage, x for bills, x for food and x for petrol so that plasma TV will have to wait".

A concept that the British public seems to be unable to grasp.

[quotemehappy]

We are very lucky to an extent that we receive free banking in this country, there are many countries around the world where you have to pay for the privilege of having a bank account.

The people who have free bank accounts and then complain about being charged £x for going overdrawn are just so retarded and are lucky then dont have to pay for their accounts even if they only have £1.25 in there.

[AlexKP]

FarleyRusk said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Did you actually read the article before starting this especially pointless rant?
Excess charges apply to unauthorised overdrafts. Sounds fair to me. If you don't want to get stung don't borrow money without the lender's permission. Quite easy really

Yes I did read it, and I posed a provocative question.

Poor form to jump in with an immediate insult. Maybe grow up a bit and debate with civility? Just a suggestion.

[FarleyRusk]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

And that's not trolling because...?

All too easy to jump on the anti-bank bandwagon right now I guess. Well this particular poster took offence to your attempted "scam"
Suggest to try something a little less low-brow next time, perhaps? There's a good chap!

[pits]

Dare2Fail said:

jamoor said:

fesuvious said:

Im afraid that whilst we might baulk at the amount they charge, the fact that anyone has a charge levied against them is their own fault

To charge £35 for going over your overdraft might sting, and it might be excessive, but its the account holders fault its happened not the banks.

ETA

If you don't like the rules, play a different game

Edited by fesuvious on Saturday 28th March 11:35

Well, why do they honour the transaction, why don't they say "no, we don't have any money to give you, sorry!"

Because then you would have threads on here and complaints in public about how terrible the banks are for "returning the direct debit for my mortgage because I was only £5 short.".

Care to explain why my one account was £20 overdrawn, I use the account once a month, pay money in, gets taken out straight away for my loan.
So my balance stood at £120D, I then get a letter through telling me I am £253 o/d, now honouring £5, or £10 on an account yeh fair enough.

Due to a momumental cock up, a cheque was written out for £120 out of my bank account by accident a mix up with the cheque books, they honoured it for £120!!! Which then of course, ment I got charged £25, they then blocked my account and all my DD going out of that account
In simple terms they royally fked me over....AGAIN!!!!

• overdrawn account by £20
• Cheque gets written for £120, they honour it
• They then block my account, 2 days from my DD going out, this was Friday, I couldnt get to a bank to sort this out, not only that, I cant go in on a saturday, because they dont do proper banking then
• So my DD wont go out, will charge me for that
• Will get a smudge on my credit record for missing a loan payment

Do you know what the best part of it is though, they even honoured the fking cheque which didnt even have MY signature on it.

Honestly, the way this bank is run is appualing, last year they fked me over aswell. I genuinely forgot to put money into my account and missed a DD payment, so sorted that out, paid it, next month DD didnt go out again, same month after, I missed one payment, they then cancelled my DD which they arent allowed to do, I checked with BACS.

As soon as I have paid of my loan, and credit card, fk banks I will be working on a purely cash basis from now on, any money I earn I will get it paid in cash, and have it there, I will keep one card, so if I need to pay for something, I can put money in account, then pay it on card


Also noticed my other bank account has now taken the liberty of charging me £8 for every transaction they honour if I am overdrawn, plus a £22 usage fee, fking ridiculous

[deadslow]

quotemehappy said:

We are very lucky to an extent that we receive free banking in this country

You are having a laugh. Any idea what each of us is paying to save/subsidise these parasites?

[Ed.]

Some of the banks made bad decisions but the govt. forcing them to take additional risks to help those they have no responsibility to help made it worse. (Lloyds /HBOS, US sub prime mortgages)

[Jasandjules]

thinfourth2 said:

I think there is a huge market for a "bank" that charges for its services rather then uses my money to fk about with and invest in something utterly stupid to try and make a profit.

Edited by thinfourth2 on Saturday 28th March 11:15

So that you know, a lot of the investment banking arms of retail banks make the profits that enable the retail side of the business to offer "free" banking.

[V8mate]

I think there needs to be another catageory of 'Have never trusted banks'.

My involvement with banks (and other financial institutions) is set at the minimum I need to get by. Have never had any faith in them to do anything worthwhile or beneficial for their customers.

[AstonZagato]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[NDA]

AstonZagato said:

Many very intelligent people lay the blame of origin of this particular crisis at the door of the Clinton administration and their desire to see the financial system further the administration's social goals. He leant on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the US government backed mortgage lenders) to cut their lending standards. This was a specific social agenda: to ensure a supply of ready mortgage credit to all - very specifically including the poorest members of the community. However, what it did was (admittedly unwittingly) to unleash the first wave of sub-prime lending bubble on the banking system AND place many, many poor people into a level of debt from which they could not escape. In short, this experiment in social engineering using the financial system was a disaster.

You mess with the profit motive at your peril.

I think the original legislation was drafted by Carter in 1977 and then strengthened by Clinton. As you suggest, it enabled certain minority groups to litigate if they were not shown due consideration under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). In addition banks received CRA credit by lending in lower-income areas that most would consider too high a risk.

In simple terms:

1. Gimme a loan man against my $40 house!
2. Erm
3. I'll sue your ass under the CRA man
4. Loan agreed
5. Repeat until system explodes.

Job done. CDO packaged up, resold, resold again, bought by UK banks.

[AstonZagato]

To be clear, I do think that the OFT should be able to opine on bank charges. If there is collusion or unfair practices, then I think that the banks should be able to be held to account. But, whether owned by the state or not, banks should pursue sound business opportunities and charge fees that are realistic / competitive.