ChatterBank0 min ago
The Great bank robbery : yet another : 167% overdrafts !
http://news.uk.msn.co...-documentid=154159613
)))))The banking industry has defended its fees after research suggested people with unauthorised overdrafts were being charged average interest of 167% a year.
Business Secretary Vince Cable accused the high street banks of "ripping off" their customers and failing to be transparent over the fees they levied.
He added that consumers were losing out because of a lack of competition in a marketplace that was dominated by a small number of big banks.
His comments came after research for BBC One's Panorama found that many consumers were paying far higher interest on authorised and unauthorised overdrafts than the rates advertised by banks, once additional charges were factored in.
The research indicated that once these fees were included, the average annual rate charged for an authorised overdraft by the high street banks was 32%, despite the fact that many accounts advertised rates of around 19%.
The average annual charge was even higher for people who went into the red without permission, at 167%, once all the different fees had been factored in.
But the British Bankers' Association defended the charges, pointing out that as overdrafts were designed to be used for only a few days, it was impossible to calculate accurate annual lending rates((((
I agree with Vince - what do you think ?
)))))The banking industry has defended its fees after research suggested people with unauthorised overdrafts were being charged average interest of 167% a year.
Business Secretary Vince Cable accused the high street banks of "ripping off" their customers and failing to be transparent over the fees they levied.
He added that consumers were losing out because of a lack of competition in a marketplace that was dominated by a small number of big banks.
His comments came after research for BBC One's Panorama found that many consumers were paying far higher interest on authorised and unauthorised overdrafts than the rates advertised by banks, once additional charges were factored in.
The research indicated that once these fees were included, the average annual rate charged for an authorised overdraft by the high street banks was 32%, despite the fact that many accounts advertised rates of around 19%.
The average annual charge was even higher for people who went into the red without permission, at 167%, once all the different fees had been factored in.
But the British Bankers' Association defended the charges, pointing out that as overdrafts were designed to be used for only a few days, it was impossible to calculate accurate annual lending rates((((
I agree with Vince - what do you think ?
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by olddutch. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I have a certain degree of symapthy with the banks on this one (I d think there are other areas that they are taking the mick though)
An unauthorised overdraft is spending money you dont have and haven't agreed with the bank beforehand.
That has to represent a risky transaction - it's also behaviour that any responsible bank would want to discourage its customers from doing.
The alternative is to deny the transaction - I'm sure the bank would be willing to do that instead - charging you a hefty sum for doing it and writing you a letter telling you they've done it is one area that I think customers do have a right to be stroppy about
An unauthorised overdraft is spending money you dont have and haven't agreed with the bank beforehand.
That has to represent a risky transaction - it's also behaviour that any responsible bank would want to discourage its customers from doing.
The alternative is to deny the transaction - I'm sure the bank would be willing to do that instead - charging you a hefty sum for doing it and writing you a letter telling you they've done it is one area that I think customers do have a right to be stroppy about
The first, and ONLY, duty of any business is to maximise their profits. (That's embodied in company law. Shareholders come first, last and everywhere in between). I fail to see why anyone should object to a business seeking to do exactly that.
I will support every business which seeks to screw every single penny out of their customers. I detest any business which actually cares a fig for the real interests of their customers. (In my opinion, anyone who really cares about either their customers or their staff has absolutely no right whatsoever to be running any type of business).
In business profit must ALWAYS matter and people must NEVER matter. We all like to benefit from capitalism but few seem to want to pay the inevitable costs of it.
Chris
I will support every business which seeks to screw every single penny out of their customers. I detest any business which actually cares a fig for the real interests of their customers. (In my opinion, anyone who really cares about either their customers or their staff has absolutely no right whatsoever to be running any type of business).
In business profit must ALWAYS matter and people must NEVER matter. We all like to benefit from capitalism but few seem to want to pay the inevitable costs of it.
Chris
///if they didn't charge people who can't manage their finances then we'd all be paying for current account banking. So I for one support the banks on this.//// I had a feeling you might Geezer - you’re the OTT Johnny Giles of AB news - come on get real , an average of 167% is well OTT !
///It's really very simple, if you borrow unauthorised it hurts, ain't rocket science is it?/// it was rocket science (or at least rocket scientists) that created the destructive CDO contagion and the money mess we're in as I remember it ?
Jake good answer - agree with all you say esp "they are taking the mick though" - yes 167% is extortionate “End of” - to pinch a Geezer phrase
///Don't go in "The Red" no charges,simple./// you’re a hard man everhard
Beuncho/Chris - you're a troublemaker :-)
///It's really very simple, if you borrow unauthorised it hurts, ain't rocket science is it?/// it was rocket science (or at least rocket scientists) that created the destructive CDO contagion and the money mess we're in as I remember it ?
Jake good answer - agree with all you say esp "they are taking the mick though" - yes 167% is extortionate “End of” - to pinch a Geezer phrase
///Don't go in "The Red" no charges,simple./// you’re a hard man everhard
Beuncho/Chris - you're a troublemaker :-)
yes no doubt it's 167% if you use the ridiculous APR calculation but in reality it's probably about 20% interest + £25-30 fee etc. All I'm saying dutch is that the account holder must take some responsibility. As I said above if the banks didn't charge for the miscreants then they'd have to charge everyone like in the old days when it cost per transaction, cheque etc I prefer to have my free current account banking and just discipline myself to not spend what I don't have.
Why is helping yourself to the bank's money allowed? You couldn't help yourself to goods in a shop, leave an IOU without the shop's agreement, so where's the difference?
When will people start accepting responsibility for themselves instead of whingeing about it?
If people are still going overdrawn without authority despite paying all the charges, what would they be like if there was no penalty?
When will people start accepting responsibility for themselves instead of whingeing about it?
If people are still going overdrawn without authority despite paying all the charges, what would they be like if there was no penalty?
The difference is that this is with the banks permission otherwise they simply would decline the transaction.
You're obviously in the happy position of being financially solvent and don't seem to appreciate the position of people who live close to the financial edge.
Do you find the air a little thin up there on your high horse?
You're obviously in the happy position of being financially solvent and don't seem to appreciate the position of people who live close to the financial edge.
Do you find the air a little thin up there on your high horse?
//// yes no doubt it's 167% if you use the ridiculous APR calculation but in reality it's probably about 20% interest + £25-30 fee etc. All I'm saying dutch is that the account holder must take some responsibility. As I said above if the banks didn't charge for the miscreants then they'd have to charge everyone like in the old days when it cost per transaction, cheque etc I prefer to have my free current account banking and just discipline myself to not spend what I don't have//// OK geezer i take your points - but its still obvious the level of charges are well overcooked and everyone you included can see this. As you know, the banks also make loads from all our positive balances and many many other financial products.
1 to 11 of 11
Latest Posts
Starmer's Approval Rating Plummets,
News1 min ago
ChatterBank3 mins ago
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.