|
Joe Giltrap : Time banks stopped fleecing customers  THE
BANKS do not seem to be able to work out the difference between fair profit
and monstrous rip-off. They have elevated arrogance to an art form.
Nobody objects to any business making a profit because if it does not
it cannot invest in the future and eventually collapses.
Every sane person understands this reasoning.
However the fact that some banks have paid out millions — I saw
one estimate at £550million — to customers, or should I say
victims, who complained about the scandalous bank charges and threatened
court action tends to suggest that they know they are wrong.
Far from holding up their hands and admitting it they will fight it to
the bitter end.
No bank ever gave money back willingly or out of the goodness of its heart.
If they are paying out millions to those who have complained and claimed
in an attempt to keep the lid on it then how much do they fear they will
be hit for if they lose the case?
It is a percentage game for the banks as it usually is for any big business
facing a court action.
The breweries played a similar stalling game some years ago when tenants
were contesting the legality of the purchasing tie.
The banks have tried to avoid the courts like the plague but a court case
is pending and the eventual ruling will have far-reaching consequences
for the banks.
I imagine that if they lose they will still stall as long as possible
by appealing because this is about money — lots and lots of money.
They could not care less about the immorality of fleecing customers.
I have yet to actually meet someone who has fought them and received a
refund so if any readers of this column have personal experience of this
I
would certainly love to hear it.
How can a bank justify charging £38 for slipping into the red even
if it is only for a few pence?
This means that your account is now £38 and a few pence in the red
and before you know it you are in deep trouble.
They also charge a ridiculous amount for sending out a computer-generated
letter that actually costs a few pence.
I firmly believe that people should be able to charge the banks a similar
amount if forced to write pointing out errors.
They cannot keep having it their own way and it remains to be seen if
the court rules them out of order.
For far too long they were a law unto themselves and needed to be challenged.
If they do lose in court — and I sincerely hope they do —
then I have my claim nearly ready.
It is rather large and does not make for pleasant reading.
I might even consider opening a bank with the money.
|
