Nope, I made an assumption which turned out to be correct. There was detail in the small print that proves that my assumpotion was correct, i.e. the account or mortgage is not such a good deal as it fist appears.You may construct your view of the world by reading adverts but most of us have sufficient experience of life to be able to form a reasonable understanding of a product without finding it necessary to read the small print.I'm only too willing to admit my mistakes, and if you think not looking at the advert for the account is a mistake, than I would not agree.Well on the lloyds site it's on the bullet points of the product. I'd agree and imagine that there may well be other ways they'll get their money back like restrictions on the overdraft limit plus possible 'charges' for using it that are equal to or greater than the interest that would have accrued, ie not interest, which is bad, but something like interest but not called interest therefore acceptable. I would have expected though that if you offered the minimum balance as an objection to the discussion you would have looked at the account first, though everyone makes mistakes.
It stands to reason that the bank is not going to offer interest free accounts or mortgages without finding some other method to make it worth their while. I don't need to read the small print or the advert to know that much.
Well, posting without any background understanding of the topic has never stopped you before so be my guest, I was only trying to guide you to becoming a more constructive poster.
You formed an incorrect view because you made an assumption.
Nope, you said there would be a minimum balance, which there isn't. Again, not in the small print, on the first page in massive writing. Endemic of your complete lack of cognitive ability, any thinking person would think "It maybe has a minimum balance, I'll have a quick look so I don't post it and look like an idiot". Not you, Roguehanger.