[Sussex] Bank charges, important court case

[Andrew Guard]

On 07/04/07, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel at gmail.com> wrote:
> Andy Smith wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 08:43:14AM +0100, Andrew Guard wrote:
> >
> >> The barrister Tom Brennan believes bank penalty charges are illegal
> >> and he try to get "exemplary damages". plus full refund. And the bank
> >> has no choice but to defend this action.
> >>
> >
> > This sort of thing makes me quite uncomfortable.  I was a student
> > once.  I was terrible with money.  I always went over my overdraft
> > limit and got charged stupid amounts for it.  I wasn't much better
> > in the first few years of work after uni either.  Is that the bank's
> > fault?  I believe it was my fault and no one is to blame but me; I
> > would not dream of trying to claim any of it back.
> >
> Is it me, or does this seem amazingly off-topic for this list?
>
> That said, he's not suing because there are overdraft charges. He's
> suing because he thinks they're ridiculously, even larcenously high, and
> the banks have apparently always caved in rather than actually go to
> court to see if they're being outrageous. And he does seem to have a
> point in his case, where there was an unauthorized withdrawal against
> his account which triggered a series of overdraft charges.
>
> Making people jump through hoops to get their money back after excessive
> overdraft charges, but eventually letting them get their money back if
> they actually take it to court, is not the same as not overcharging them
> in the first place. And it *is* a problem: I just had a problem where an
> employer told me "you're getting paid Monday", and I wrote someone a
> check for Tuesday based on that, but the money didn't come through until
> Thursday because it was routed through another company.

Yep they do take there time but for everyone I have helped they have
got all there money refunded to them.

>
> "You're getting paid Monday" is not the same as "we're sending someone
> else a check Monday and they'll pay you when they get around to it": I
> didn't know about the other company being involved: I took them at their
> word. So I damn near had a big check bounc

When BACS goes wrong do banks pay us money due to there error.
No.
Strange that, talk about one sided. Can I fine the banks each time try
to use ATM and not working, No. But I have the funds there but them
not letting me access to it. I don't care if broken or out cash that
not my problem. So each time this happens the bank should give me £30.

Also why on this earth do fund transfers take days when it all done
electronically. I forgot sending numbers thought network will take
days, you see this e-mail has more data and it is quicker because it
is e-mail.  Send data which is about money suffers from network issue
which is called "profiteering". When networks are attacked with
"profiteering" a strange and unexplainable lag will happen that
becomes impossible to resolve.

Banks think the public are think, well we are not. The banks will soon
charge monthly charge private  accounts, well go to hell. They make
enough money from business transactions with private transactions
there will be no money to make from business transactions.

But interesting things might happen in future. Just imagine if a FOI
was applied on business which has income of more £5Billion a year.