Bank Charges.....they seem fair enough to me

[saxondale]

strewth - they are a business, there isnt a NHS for money

no one and I mean no needs a bank account, but if you do you should be prepared to pay for that service

Joe - you do everything for cost ? (actually a daft question because he probably does)

you cannot have " extra profit..." thats an oxymoron, the fact you see shiny new branches is to attract shiny new business not because they have "too much.." money

nationalise the lot then ? seems to be your wish and we know how trust worthy and honest the nations rulers are - dont we?

 

[Bilioustrumpstaine]

So Saxondale which bank do you work for

Banks are a business and need to make a profit but not in robbing money from those who can least afford it.

I would rather see a monthly charge to operate an account.

I think bank charges are exactly like speeding fines.

Drive past a speed camera at x mph over the limit get a fine.
Go over your financial limit at the bank and get a fine.

 

[aspley]

strewth - they are a business, there isnt a NHS for money

no one and I mean no needs a bank account, but if you do you should be prepared to pay for that service

Joe - you do everything for cost ? (actually a daft question because he probably does)

you cannot have " extra profit..." thats an oxymoron, the fact you see shiny new branches is to attract shiny new business not because they have "too much.." money

nationalise the lot then ? seems to be your wish and we know how trust worthy and honest the nations rulers are - dont we?

Good stuff Saxondale.............and an interesting question to Joe.....can't wait for the answer........probably charges at a discount to cost for the benefit of all mankind.

And another point....does anyone seriously think that the true cost of bouncing a cheque is the cost of pressing a button to send a letter out?? That is like saying the cost of an orange is directly linked to the cost of picking it of the tree!!

 

[saxondale]

Banks are a business and need to make a profit but not in robbing money from those who can least afford it. if you cant afford it you dont buy it - whever its oranges (to continue a theme) alchohol or banking

I would rather see a monthly charge to operate an account.

I`ve never had a free bank account

I think bank charges are exactly like speeding fines.

ones a legislated statute and the others a voluntary agreement

Drive past a speed camera at x mph over the limit get a fine.
Go over your financial limit at the bank and get a fine.

thats just the consequenses of two totaly different actions

whip round to send Joe to North Korea ? I believe there still govt. controlled

 

[joe-90]

Look folks. The concept here is simple. It's called USER PAYS. If user one goes into the red then user one pays the amount that it cost the bank. If user two wants to bank then they pay the charges that the bank expects.

The way things stand at the moment is user two gets free banking because user one (often poor) gets caught with charges used to fund user two.

USER PAYS - it's the only fair way.

Let's assume that the banks decide the charges should be increased to £5000 and they pubish this or shall we make it £100,000 and they publish this. Would you still agree with the principle that banks can charge what they like? I doubt it.

 

[Bilioustrumpstaine]

And another point....does anyone seriously think that the true cost of bouncing a cheque is the cost of pressing a button to send a letter out?? That is like saying the cost of an orange is directly linked to the cost of picking it of the tree!!

I doubt if anyone even pushes a button in this day and age.

I don't quite understand your point with the fruit picking scenario.

Do you mean the cost of producing an orange or the cost of the orange in the shop to the customer. And the cost of the picking.......no I don't get it.

Bank charges are way too high. The Office of Fair Trading wouldn't be taking a test case to court unless they were pretty confident that they had areasonable chance.
Banks have, until recently, been refunding charges when threatened with court action as they were worried about losing a landmark case and opening the floodgates. After some while and several million pounds of payouts they decided that they may as well go to court as it would make no difference if the case was found against them as they were paying out anyway. So even the banks know they have been overcharging.

 

[aspley]

Let's assume that the banks decide the charges should be increased to £5000 and they pubish this or shall we make it £100,000 and they publish this. Would you still agree with the principle that banks can charge what they like? I doubt it.

Ok Joe....lets go back to the orange analagy....err on second thoughts lets do it with turnips instead that might make more sense to you.

If a turnip was put on the shelf with a £5000 price tag no one would buy it....they would go elsewhere.....it's called market forces. I might be wrong but I suspect the same would apply to a bank charge of that amount. And yes, I would defend there democratic right to try and charge that.....be a self desrtuctive thing to do thogh

 

[aspley]

And another point....does anyone seriously think that the true cost of bouncing a cheque is the cost of pressing a button to send a letter out?? That is like saying the cost of an orange is directly linked to the cost of picking it of the tree!!

I doubt if anyone even pushes a button in this day and age.

I don't quite understand your point with the fruit picking scenario.

Do you mean the cost of producing an orange or the cost of the orange in the shop to the customer. And the cost of the picking.......no I don't get it.

Bank charges are way too high. The Office of Fair Trading wouldn't be taking a test case to court unless they were pretty confident that they had areasonable chance.
Banks have, until recently, been refunding charges when threatened with court action as they were worried about losing a landmark case and opening the floodgates. After some while and several million pounds of payouts they decided that they may as well go to court as it would make no difference if the case was found against them as they were paying out anyway. So even the banks know they have been overcharging.

The point I was trying to make is that there is a whole infrastructure that is necessary to get that orange to the market place.....the same applies to bouncing a cheque. The fact is it is not just a matter of pressing a button.

 

[Bilioustrumpstaine]

And another point....does anyone seriously think that the true cost of bouncing a cheque is the cost of pressing a button to send a letter out?? That is like saying the cost of an orange is directly linked to the cost of picking it of the tree!!

I doubt if anyone even pushes a button in this day and age.

I don't quite understand your point with the fruit picking scenario.



The point I was trying to make is that there is a whole infrastructure that is necessary to get that orange to the market place.....the same applies to bouncing a cheque. The fact is it is not just a matter of pressing a button.

OK got it now

But surely the main infrastructure of the bank is already in place to service the day to day core business of the bank.

It would be like your fruitpicker being instructed to look out for truffles around the base of the orange trees. They would sell for a lot more than oranges and the labour cost would be minimal as the guy was already picking oranges and pausing to pick up a few truffles would not interfere with his day that much.

 

[joe-90]

Let's assume that the banks decide the charges should be increased to £5000 and they pubish this or shall we make it £100,000 and they publish this. Would you still agree with the principle that banks can charge what they like? I doubt it.

Ok Joe....lets go back to the orange analagy....err on second thoughts lets do it with turnips instead that might make more sense to you.

If a turnip was put on the shelf with a £5000 price tag no one would buy it....they would go elsewhere.....it's called market forces. I might be wrong but I suspect the same would apply to a bank charge of that amount. And yes, I would defend there democratic right to try and charge that.....be a self desrtuctive thing to do thogh

If every supermarket or shop sold turnips for £5000 and the public had no choice but to eat turnips - well that makes your argument look rather silly doesn''t it?

 

[aspley]

Let's assume that the banks decide the charges should be increased to £5000 and they pubish this or shall we make it £100,000 and they publish this. Would you still agree with the principle that banks can charge what they like? I doubt it.

Ok Joe....lets go back to the orange analagy....err on second thoughts lets do it with turnips instead that might make more sense to you.

If a turnip was put on the shelf with a £5000 price tag no one would buy it....they would go elsewhere.....it's called market forces. I might be wrong but I suspect the same would apply to a bank charge of that amount. And yes, I would defend there democratic right to try and charge that.....be a self desrtuctive thing to do thogh

If every supermarket or shop sold turnips for £5000 and the public had no choice but to eat turnips - well that makes your argument look rather silly doesn''t it?

But Joe.....every supermarket wouldn't sell turnips for five grand cause no one would buy them....market forces rule KO!!

 

[noseall]

the fact of the matter is , a bank will charge you for an unauthorized overdraft.

most people are aware of this.

the level of charging may be extortionate, but still people will go overdrawn, in the knowledge they will be charged.

and yet these banks still attract new customers.

either market forces dictate that folks have little choice and the banks have a monopoly, or that bank charges are a relevant and justified quantity that is deemed acceptable.

are banks regulated?
is there a bankers ombudsman?

 

[joe-90]

Let's assume that the banks decide the charges should be increased to £5000 and they pubish this or shall we make it £100,000 and they publish this. Would you still agree with the principle that banks can charge what they like? I doubt it.

Ok Joe....lets go back to the orange analagy....err on second thoughts lets do it with turnips instead that might make more sense to you.

If a turnip was put on the shelf with a £5000 price tag no one would buy it....they would go elsewhere.....it's called market forces. I might be wrong but I suspect the same would apply to a bank charge of that amount. And yes, I would defend there democratic right to try and charge that.....be a self desrtuctive thing to do thogh

If every supermarket or shop sold turnips for £5000 and the public had no choice but to eat turnips - well that makes your argument look rather silly doesn''t it?

But Joe.....every supermarket wouldn't sell turnips for five grand cause no one would buy them....market forces rule KO!!

The big supermarkets are in bother because they formed a cartel to raise the price of milk. The banks would also be seen as a cartel - hence they can't get away with it.

Tell me why you are so keen that the banks rip off the people?

 

[aspley]

Tell me why you are so keen that the banks rip off the people?

Joe....I honestly don't think they do. In my experience they are as open as any business with regard to what they offer and what they charge, they pay my D/D's, cheques and S/O's when they are supposed to, I find the staff in their branches are freindly and helpfull. That is my honest experience...absolutely no complaints.
So my view is based on what I see and feel not on what I read in the papers. The papers main aim is to increase circulation not give a balanced view, it just wouldn't do for them to say the banks give a good service or are fair on charges.

 

[saxondale]

The big supermarkets are in bother because they formed a cartel to raise the price of milk. The banks would also be seen as a cartel - hence they can't get away with it.

Tell me why you are so keen that the banks rip off the people?

" final call for all passengers traveling to Cuba... would Joe90 please board the plane at gate number 13...."

no one needs a bank account ( thats what the post office is for if you want a govt. bank to pay your bills through)

the supermarkets got into trouble because they dropped the price they paid the producer not becaues they raised the price they charged - thats an artificial market manipulationt so they got fined ( fined see not charged)

banks dont rip people off - we rip people off everytime we walk through the door using your argument