talizman

iTrader: (1)

Sial?

BBC NEWS | Business | Man recovers £35,988 from NatWest

Jerome

Couldn't happen to a nicer bank.

Abdabz

So he managed his finances appallingly, was charged in accordance with his accounts terms and conditions and then had the gall to claim them back?
I know the charges applied are higher than the cost incurred to the bank, but this takes the biscuit...
The banks will make all this money back in other ways, none of us will benefit in the long run. It's reminiscent of whiplash claims bumping up car insurance or dodgy storm damage claims to roofs bumping up house insurance...
I was recently charged £28.00 by the bank because a cheque I had written bounced, in an account I rarely use with the Natwest and was "cleared" a day earlier than planned... (oi loikes armadillos)
At first I though I should pursue this outrage. Then I realised the charge was my fault and to try and claim it back would make me a tw@t.
It seems to me that this bank charge compensation bandwagon is a savings account for the financially and mentally inept...

DanUK

I think the point is it shouldn't cost you £28.00 for that mistake, not that we make mistakes.

Banks make a profit out of our mistakes and I think THAT is worng. If it cost a fiver I wouldn't have such an issue!
It should reflect the time and work required iat a fair rate

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

I agree with DanUK, but in this case there is an even more important issue.

Here we have a person who setup in business and is clearly trying to make a go of it. He is employing people, paying tax, and not sitting at home on the dole. Banks are meant to help these people start up and keep their companies running. Even with all the s*it Natwest threw at him, he kept going and now has a successful business.

Many others will not have been so lucky as to survive charges like that.

Its not evil for banks to make money, and its not wrong for you to pay where you should. Their charges should come down, and if they need to charge more elsewhere, then so be it. Ripping off the poor is not the way a banking system should be run.

StickyMicky

have you ever ran a small business??

miss*scoobygav555*

I just had a recent blow with the natwest, I loaned some money off them to clear my HPI on my car and was paying the loan straight back to bank once I received the cash for my car, they give you 2 weeks cooling off period were you can give them the money back free of charge which I thought great, just what I needed to do, then GE Money (fiance company) decided it takes 14 working days for a cheque to clear so my lending of the money went over the 2 week paying back period. I asked before I loaned the money what would happen just in case I went over the 2 week cooling off period but paid the money back before my first payment came out and the bank manager told me I would be charge very little, around £30 so I thought thats not too bad so I went a head with the loan. I went last week to give them the money back, 3 days after the cooling off period and they wanted to charge me £200 to do this !! Not what the bank manger told me when I loaned the money !!! I got really upset because its a lot of money really to be fined, I kicked up a stink about it and said if I had to pay the fine I would be closing all my accounts with them and going else where, the account manager phoned me about half an hour of me leaving the bank and said they'll waver the charge, made it out like she was doing me a favour, was soooooooooo angry that I'd been lied to about the paying off charge, if I knew it was going to be that much I would have loaned the money from else where!!!

$hite bank!!!

Miniman

iTrader: (2)

Yet they still paid out £38k. Remember, never admit you were wrong, never, send out loads of money but never admit you are wrong.

Abdabz

No Sticky but I have been brought up in a family who have run a successful 3 man operation for 25 years and they, like you, have business account(s) with a bank. When they set it/them up, they signed terms and conditions...
These T&C's said that bounced transactions would be charged at £x. They said that overdrafts were not unlimited and customers knew from day one what would happen if they failed to maintain their accounts properly.

So where DanUK states "I think the point is it shouldn't cost you £28.00 for that mistake, not that we make mistakes." I disagree. it should cost me that because that is what I agreed to when I opened my account. The way to avoid the charge is not to make the mistake in the first place...

Now, I'm not saying that running your own business is easy, but if you're frequently incurring 3k a month in bank charges for unpaid items, you seriously need to step back and consider your strategy...
The bank is a business, that offers a service at a price, a price agreed to with every customer who has ever opened an account with any bank anywhere...

As for this guy "paying his taxes" and all that "fair play" malarky. It seems the bank were actually paying them for him, so fair play to the bank really...

I admire the publics solidarity of the big corporation being beaten by the little man. It's warming and most of the nation will applaud it...

I admire this (initially) inept businessman turning it round and to see his business now doing OK is a good thing.

I just gurn at the fact that people who have been crap for years with their money (for whatever reason) are now getting a healthy windfall for their "troubles"...

It's symptomatic of this country today that so many look at every opportunity for recompense and compensation at every turn and for me, it's a real shame...

vindaloo

My opinion.

Yes, some people are not financially astute or even properly capable. Some deserve to be called ***** and idiots and irresponsible idiots but circumstances mean that we can all get caught out from time to time.

The guy in question was running a business. His first priority was to build up his business and satisfy his customers. I dunno but maybe this was his first venture or startup. He wouldn't necessarily have much in the way of experience of managing or regulating cashflow. All to many companies fall through due to cashflow delays and unsympathetic banks.

It's been law since 1999 that fees and charges must not be a penalty but must account for the cost of any extraordinary action (i.e. computer produces a letter). The banks and other financial institutions have had since then to get their house in order.

What do you call it when someone takes money off you unjustly or unlawfully? At the best, you call it an oversight or a mistake. Stronger definitions would be fraud, obtaining money by deception etc.

IMO that's the reason the banks will not go to court. If a precedent is set by someone winning a case, then criminal proceedings may well follow.

Also, the gov't don't want to kill of the UK banking infrastructure by having a bigger scandal. Banking makes the UK a lot of money and we're good at it, especially at the moment. So IMO, they're leaning on the banks to co-operate but not bringing out too many of the really big guns to force matters through.

J.

CharlesW

To my knowledge, but correct me if I am wrong, no bank has yet challenged this in court. Doesn't that suggest to you that they know it would fail in court.
It will be interesting to see the outcome of the case, where a barrister is taking them to court on exactly this point to prove that the banks are wrong.

StickyMicky

employing outsiders is a much bigger challenge than getting some family members in to help out?

when you start employing outsiders, all manner of things start going **** up, calling in sick, stealing, lazy ****ers etc etc

its easy to get left behind with the cash, i can remember lending money off my GF to help pay wages for a person who turned out to be a lying cheating ****.

the lessons are harsh need to be learned quick!

the amount of times i have had to chase my customers for payment is IMO out of order, including me having to find somebodys address and knock on the door but it happens............

sti-04!!

Advertising again Stick's