UK: Supreme Court Rules Bank Charges Are Legal.

I called and spoke with the bank.  They were unimpressed by my position.

Take it further.

Catch up, Bob!  Millions of people have done this!  It's what the case was all about! 

I am caught up thank you. If you read my words I said ON HERE. I am asking those on this debate if THEY have done anything. Only one says they have spoke to their bank.

For those that don't like the Unauthorised or Authorised, open a basic account that doesn't allow overdrafts. Then see what happens when you can't pay your bills. What would one's costs be if they didn't have an overdraft?

The fees may be high but if ya don't like it, don't go into the red. In the meantime, write your MP and complain. Switch accounts (see below)

I missed a few payments on my CC because I paid too early. I got charged. It happen a few times. What did I do, spoke to the bank, paid the charges and paid closer attention to the dates.

I just really don't get the outrage. For the odd accident or not-my-mistake, I can maybe understand but for the run of the mill mis-management of their funds, I don't get it.

MoneyfactsUK  states the problem with overdrafts is that many people don’t keep an eye on just how much they are dipping into them. They also state Unauthorised O/D's should only ever be used in an emergency. Must be an awful lot of emergencies out there.

2 banks offer the following:
The Alliance & Leicester Premier Direct current account offers a 0% overdraft facility for the first year pay in at least £500 every month.
After a year, you will start beginning charged 50p a day for any overdraft remaining. On the plus side however, these charges are capped at £5 a month, whereas the Halifax charges are uncapped.

Alternatively, the Abbey Preferred Overdraft rate account also offers a 0% overdraft facility for the first year. However, you will need to pay at least £1,000 every month into this account.

Catch up, Bob!  Millions of people have done this!  It's what the case was all about!  

Another instance where this (unauthorised overdraft) happens frequently...Bank customer has a loan with the same bank as their current account, and the loan payments are taken direct debit from the current account.  Person loses their job, goes on strike, etc etc...can't afford to make a loan payment.  Ring - rings the bank.  (Or writes)  "Please bank, don't take my loan payment - I lost my job, etc - don't have the money, can't we negotiate something until I can sort something out here?"

Guess what?  Bank still takes the loan payment because the bank doesn't care, and the person is in unauthorised overdraft - which can often cause a domino effect on down into their other household bills and direct debits.

Good reason NEVER to have your current account at the same place that you owe money to (cause that bank is going to own you & all your wages given half a chance).

I found this completely untrue with Royal Bank of Scotland as my hubby has his loan (£384/month) with them and his bank account.  When he called the bank to tell them that he was on strike and might have a hard time making his payments until January, they offered:  A) to defer his payments by 3 months, adding them to the end of the loan BUT there would be additional interest charged or B) to extend his agreed upon overdraft limit by £1000 (which would cover the loan payments until January and also have some leftover to help with other bills). 

But apparently my hubby and I are the only people living in this country who have other options available to us, so I guess that's a moot point.

I am caught up thank you. If you read my words I said ON HERE. I am asking those on this debate if THEY have done anything. Only one says they have spoke to their bank.

Maybe that's the only person who has been personally affected & who happens to be posting on this thread.  If you don't have an overdraft issue, it'd be a little difficult to complain about one.  

For those that don't like the Unauthorised or Authorised, open a basic account that doesn't allow overdrafts. Then see what happens when you can't pay your bills. What would one's costs be if they didn't have an overdraft?

Just because a basic account doesn't have an overdraft privilege/line of credit, banks can and do still put charges through on these, putting people into unauthorised overdrafts.  That is to say, they don't even adhere to their own policies - i.e., no overdraft should mean no overdraft.

I found this completely untrue with Royal Bank of Scotland as my hubby has his loan (£384/month) with them and his bank account.  When he called the bank to tell them that he was on strike and might have a hard time making his payments until January, they offered:  A) to defer his payments by 3 months, adding them to the end of the loan BUT there would be additional interest charged or B) to extend his agreed upon overdraft limit by £1000 (which would cover the loan payments until January and also have some leftover to help with other bills).  

But apparently my hubby and I are the only people living in this country who have other options available to us, so I guess that's a moot point.

I'm happy they were able to work with you and your husband.  But I see what I explained happen regularly to many people (I work in a consumer advocacy role).  It's not an isolated occurrence.

It must be nice for some of you who live in a perfect financial world where mistakes never happen ever with your account. I don't mean to sound snarky, but arguing so vehemently that is such a big deal that we consumers are terrible if we OD (unauthorized) for whatever reason is quite shocking, especially considering what has just happened with the bank bail outs. And guess who got to pay for it this time? The consumer. Again.

Sure banks (or any business) can do what they like, but why would you want to make your customers hate you and screw them for the sake of "business"? Just like with the loan sharking scandals that just came out in the UK last year, there is a wrong and a right. There are legal consumer protections in place for a reason.

I'm on cold meds so I'm probably not articulating this well, but hopefully you all understand what my point is!

Yeah, I don't get the judgmental lack of compassion either.  If there is a victim in this, it sure ain't the banks.

If the banks can't pay their bills, the government bails them out...so they (the banks) can charge their customers up the ying-yang when the customers can't pay theirs, and then take them to court if all else fails. 

Maybe that's the only person who has been personally affected & who happens to be posting on this thread.  If you don't have an overdraft issue, it'd be a little difficult to complain about one.  

But some people in here think it is unjust. So they should do something. Doesn't amtter if they have an OD or not.

Just because a basic account doesn't have an overdraft privilege/line of credit, banks can and do still put charges through on these, putting people into unauthorised overdrafts.  That is to say, they don't even adhere to their own policies - i.e., no overdraft should mean no overdraft.

Not all do. But I agree no overdraft should mean no overdraft. That to me would wrong and I would go so far as to say these cases do have a case. Unless there is something in that small print.

Just to add, I don't live in a perfect financial bliss. But I accept my responsibilities and don't moan about having to pay if I get caught out. Just as I don't complain when I get a speeding ticket. I knew what the score was.

And most unauthorised ODs are because people bury their heads in the sand. Not saying anyone here but an awful lot of people do an ostrich when it comes to money.

The bank bailouts are between the banks, the shareholders and the govt.

ODs are between the individual and the bank.

Take it further.

Take it further like where?  The Supreme Court?  

I just really don't get the outrage. For the odd accident or not-my-mistake, I can maybe understand but for the run of the mill mis-management of their funds, I don't get it.

But the odd accident is what we're talking about.  I haven't seen anyone on here arguing in favor of the ability to go into unauthorized overdraft on a routine or repeated manner without consequences.

...I accept my responsibilities and don't moan about having to pay if I get caught out. Just as I don't complain when I get a speeding ticket. I knew what the score was.

If I get a speeding ticket, that's one fine for one incident.  If I were getting the speeding ticket from the bank, there would be a fine assessed per mile I was speeding.  "You were speeding for 10 miles, and the fine for speeding is £100, so you owe £1000." 

Take it further like where?  The Supreme Court?  

MP? Banking omsbudsman? Don't know. Changing banks?

But the odd accident is what we're talking about.  I haven't seen anyone on here arguing in favor of the ability to go into unauthorized overdraft on a routine or repeated manner without consequences.

Sorry but it sounded like it was about the unfair rates period. If all these cases were the odd accident, then maybe I can see. But theses odd accidents, are they self-induced accidents or someone's mistake? I was stating about the number of people who repeatedly go into the red due to mismangaement of their funds, not people who go red because of someone else's mistake. That seems to be the view of moneyfactuk that most go into unauthorised because of lack of attention to their finances. And then let the charges keep building without speaking to the banks, reducing the OD with a loan or doing something other than ignoring it.

If I get a speeding ticket, that's one fine for one incident.  If I were getting the speeding ticket from the bank, there would be a fine assessed per mile I was speeding.  "You were speeding for 10 miles, and the fine for speeding is £100, so you owe £1000." 

Well you do sort of. There are differing penalities depending on your speed.

And if on the same stretch of road, on the same journey, I go through two cameras in close proximty (one mobile, one fixed - it happens), I will get 2 tickets. Unfair because it was the same journey. Unfair because the guy in town got the same ticket for the same amount over the limit as me on a motorway. That's not propotionate. But I knows the rules of the road and I pays my fine. I signed the dotted line.

I was stating about the number of people who repeatedly go into the red due to mismangaement of their funds....

Again, I'm not talking about those people, and I don't think anyone else here is, either.  Everyone should face consequences, but people who make a one-off mistake shouldn't face the same consequences as people who abuse the system repeatedly.

Again, I'm not talking about those people, and I don't think anyone else here is, either.  Everyone should face consequences, but people who make a one-off mistake shouldn't face the same consequences as people who abuse the system repeatedly.

Unfortunately life doesn't work that way.  Everybody has to pay for the mistakes of few.  And seeings how there are plenty of alternative (for those who may encounter the one-off mistake), I'm still confused how people can complain about it.  If there were no other options, I could understand...but there are.

MP? Banking omsbudsman? Don't know. Changing banks?

Yes Bob, to cut a long story short I forced RBS to repay us £1500 so does my opinion count for something now you know that? 

Unfortunately life doesn't work that way.  Everybody has to pay for the mistakes of few.  And seeings how there are plenty of alternative (for those who may encounter the one-off mistake), I'm still confused how people can complain about it.  If there were no other options, I could understand...but there are.

So if I'm so wrong why did RBS repay us £1500?

With online banking and being able to check one's bills in real time online, there is little excuse for people to not make sure they have enough money in their account to meet those payments each month.  It's called responsibility.

There's no need to drag the government into this matter, there is only a need for personal responsibility like people taking control of their money.  (Or making sure you get an overdraft facility if you suck at managing your money)

I'm with the banks on this one!

Again, I'm not talking about those people, and I don't think anyone else here is, either.  Everyone should face consequences, but people who make a one-off mistake shouldn't face the same consequences as people who abuse the system repeatedly.

Why not? No one should be going into unauthorised overdraft. OK most people must have a current account these days but it wasn't long ago that quite a few people did not have current accounts. What did they do when the employer was late with the payslips? These people that are going £10 or so in to OD, did they already have an authorised OD? Did they not see it coming?

Cases where someone has incurred an OD through no fault of their own do have a case with whoever caused it.

If I had gone into an unauthorised overdraft state due to my own fault, would have I applied for a refund? Hell yea, I ain't stupid. They aren't gonna offer it and if you don't ask, you won't get.

What is the problem of setting one's authorised limit to match the unexpected? The authorised limit should be one's buffer zone. For emergencies. As a contingency. A back-up. Set it as large as the bank will allow. How many, when opening an account, don't even consider the OD limit and just say yes when asked is £100 enough?

The FSA has stated that cases that are of genuine financial difficulty, your bank or building society must deal with your situation sympathetically and positively in line with the industry’s Lending Code.(someone else can google it, I'm tired and it ain't my OD).
 
But on a cheerier note, have a look at the link for some current accounts, these look not bad for AUTHORISED overdrafts which can be arranged usually up to £2,000. Go for the max that the bank will give you. You don't have to use it but it's there. Kinda like a credit card. I didn't see anything about rates for unauthorised overdraft but that is my point all along, fix it to where you don't go there.
http://www.lovemoney.com/currentaccounts/

Yes Bob, to cut a long story short I forced RBS to repay us £1500 so does my opinion count for something now you know that? 

It sure does! It makes my statement correct. Talk to the bank. Do something. You did. You got a good result. 

Present your case. It is at the managers discretion if you ask. I repeat, if one doesn't ask, one doesn't get.

MP? Banking omsbudsman? Don't know. Changing banks?

Plenty of us have.  On what grounds are you assuming that we don't say or do anything. We may just not want to air something very personal on a public forum like you are pushing people to, especially with the amount of judgement being applied to someone who may be very responsible but make an honest mistake on occasion.  I personally had a case that we took to the bank, then to bank managers, then to higher ups in the bank, then to complaints officers and our MP, only to end up with the ombudsman, who ruled we were in the right.  It was over a year of battles over something that clearly showed we were in the right and had been used egregiously. The bank was not only told to repay our fees, but to issue a written apology.  It took all our work and an immense amount of distress, and frankly, I'm not convinced the effort was worthwhile.  While we had moral victory, the whole lengthy process was exhausting and demeaning.  I'm annoyed that we had to go to such lengths to rectify a wrong.

I shared our other experience where the bank sent the direct debit that I had authorized (on the understanding it would be sent through only once a month) through over and over and over for two days charging us each time.  Before we had a chance to see the error from a charge we had been given to believe was cancelled before it went through, we had nearly four hundred pounds in fees (for a £20 direct debit).  My husband had held that building society account for over 30 years and been a faithful member, but they refused to forgive even one of the charges.  

We had never authorized the debit to be done repeatedly.  I repeat that we accepted responsibility for the initial error with the direct debit, and we were willing to pay a proportionate charge for that to reinburse the bank for it's own efforts and expense, but no, I do not agree that we agreed in the terms to pay hundreds for one £20 debit that should have only gone through once. The terms are written to be purposefully vague so as to be able to be applied in different situations.  We also chose not to have an overdraft that we could use on that account since we did not believe direct debits were going on that account, and therefore we assumed we could not go hundreds of pounds into debt, but we were wrong.  

Due to the tight expenses of the birth of our daughter, it took us months to be able to pay off that debt.  We could have easily sorted it with the original debitor had we been given the opportunity rather than having it charged over and over again without our authorization.  It would have been far cheaper to pay their fee just once.  I still suspect we could have fought those charges and won them back with the ombudsman's help, but frankly, I didn't want to go through the whole overwhelming process yet again for another hollow victory that would make no real difference in banking practice. We had already won before, but nothing really changed.

Plenty of us have.  On what grounds are you assuming that we don't say or do anything. We may just not want to air something very personal on a public forum like you are pushing people to, especially with the amount of judgement being applied to someone who may be very responsible but make an honest mistake on occasion.

Sorry to hear your predicament. Me personally, I would have sucked up the overdraft, learned from it and moved on. I have actually had this happen with my joint account with my ex. I assumed she had cancelled a DD, she assumed I did, the DD came off. BAM OD. But hey our mistake. I have done this a few other times in my younger days. I still do miss a CC payment or pay it too early (now that is unfair) now and then and must suck up the penalty. I could set up my safety net of a direct debit but I don't. So when I make an honest mistake and forget to pay my CC bill on time, I pay for it.

But I think you should read my post a little more careful and point out where I am assuming anything. I simply asked a question.

Of all those on here that think the charges are too high for UNAUTHORISED O/D, have you done something about it? Wrote a letter to the bank? Explored other possibilities? Wrote to your MP? What have you done about it?

 
 If people are opposed to something and complain about it on a public forum, then I would like to know what they are doing or have done about it. I don't want details. A simple we have approached the bank or whoever would suffice. You said you did that already ages ago in the thread. 
But you consider that assuming? You consider that pushing? I'm not pushing anyone to answer. That is their choice.

I am voicing my opinion just as other are. I stand by earlier comments and I support the court's decision and the banks' prerogative.

Without being pushy, I thought DDs ran repeatedly until stopped?

But just a quickie on the charges. I have seen things like it costs the bank £1.80 or £2.00 to process this. What is the real cost? They charge what £30, £39? It might all be generated by a computer but someone physically has to check these things. Using cost accounting it probably comes out about right. Is cost accounting right or not? Who knows? But that is the way companies operate. All run by accountants. Example when I worked offshore, things got so silly with cost accounting, that we would throw video machines away that were a bit fuzzy and only needed cheap new heads. Why? Because they calculated everyone's input to ship the thing back to the beach. My time, the storeman's time, the HLO's time, my boss's time, et al. It all added up to more than the cost of the machine. Dumb? Yes. But based on this cost accounting, the charges are probably about right.