Some news to warm to very cockles of your heart

[Xenocrates]

Customer sends bailiffs in to seize bank's computers
19.01.07


Declan Purcell: Striking a blow for the customer
A man who was fed up with paying massive bank charges decided to give one of the high street giants a taste of its own medicine.

When Royal Bank of Scotland refused to refund £3,400 charges that Declan Purcell believed he was owed, he sent in the bailiffs.

Stunned customers at his branch of RBS watched as debt collectors seized four computers, two fax machines and a till filled with cash.

The branch manager was told that the items would be sold unless RBS came up with the money owed to Mr Purcell.

Only when the manager gave an undertaking that the debt would be paid did the bailiffs leave.

Mr Purcell said: "I think the bank was pretty shocked when the bailiffs went in. But my view is that this is exactly what they would have done to me."

The move, which will raise a cheer from millions of other bank customers, is part of a consumer fightback against bank charges, which net an estimated £4.5 billion every year.

Every time a current account customer goes overdrawn by as little as £1 most banks will charge around £28, even though the administration cost is only about £4.50.

Then every cheque, direct debit, or card transaction that goes through or is bounced incurs another charge of up to £38.

The Office of Fair Trading is investigating whether banks have implemented these charges unlawfully.

The Daily Mail's Fair Play on Charges campaign and that run by the Consumer Action Group have helped thousands reclaim charges in the past year.

Like other customers Mr Purcell, 48, from East London, had warned his bank that he was prepared to go to court to claim back charges he believes were imposed unlawfully.

In June last year he demanded the refund of £3,400 charges he accrued during the previous six years while running a motorcycle dealership.

RBS ignored the claim so in October Mr Purcell filed an online application to get the money back through the county court.

After 30 days the bank had not responded and so on December 10 the court ruled in Mr Purcell's favour.

It ordered RBS to pay the charges and £120 court costs. When RBS again failed to respond Mr Purcell got the court to give him a warrant of execution, allowing him to order debt collectors to reclaim items from the bank equal in value to the amount he was owed.

Finally on Monday, January 8, a team of debt collectors walked into the busy Camden Town branch in North London, demanded to see the manager, showed their court order and announced that they were repossessing items.

Mr Purcell, who now works for London Underground, said: "I was dismayed by the bank's reaction when I made my claim for a refund – it was so rude and arrogant.

"They thought they were above the law, so it is great to know that customers can use the law in the same way the bank does to get money they are owed."

A spokesman for RBS said: "We are looking into this as a matter of urgency, but early indications suggest that unfortunately due to an administrative error, the bank failed to defend the claim leading to a default judgment being obtained on the branch and a resulting warrant.

"The confusion was cleared up at the branch."

Marc Gander, who set up campaign website Consumer Action Group, which helps consumers get refunds from their banks, said: "I am quite sure that Mr Purcell will not be the last person to send bailiffs in to his bank.

"The continued operation by UK high street banks of their unlawful charges regimes will see to that.

"The heavy-handed debt collecting approach is something that the banks have been handing out to their customers for years. Mr Purcell simply gave them a bit of their own back."

The fightback has started - three cheers for Mr Purcell!

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23382397-details/Customer+sends+bailiffs+in+to+seize+bank's+computers/article.do

 

[Stylesjl]

Yeah! Stick it to those dirty capitalists!

Bravo!

 

[CurtSibling]

RBS is the source of true customer-infuriating scum when it comes to banking.

I am glad someone took the option to lay down the law.

.

 

[Brighteye]

What's wrong with bank charges? If they don't charge the silly people, they'll reduce services on other things, like interest levels. Or maybe they'll start to charge interest from the moment a credit card transaction goes through, rather than at the end of the month.

Banks want to make profits. They'll screw us some way, and I'd rather it was fools being parted from their money than anyone who had a bank account.

 

[woody60707]

The OP said that bank charges may be unlawful in the UK, can someone explain to me why that would be the case.

 

[CurtSibling]

Banks are out of control with punitive charges and their tactics to harvest customer money.

Charging £25 to send a letter is over the odds.

...

 

[bhsup]

Criminy! Don't overdraft your account, problem solved.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

I like to hear this.

 

[Sidhe]

Banks are out of control with punitive charges and their tactics to harvest customer money.

Charging £25 to send a letter is over the odds.

...

[rant mode on] It's BS. It costs them probably one tenth of that, it's unfair. I was charged 480 pounds in bank charges for going overdrawn a few times, eventually the charges got so high that when I payed my rent I went overdrawn, thus incurring another charge, so that eventually I was going overdrawn just to eat and go to work, at one point without financial aid I couldn't of even have travelled to work to make the money to pay back the bank. So I left the bank, who won in the end. My lifetimes invetment gone for 480 pounds, and a lot of: computer says nooooooooo. ****witts. And I don't mean the people in the bank they were horrified at what was happening, I wrote to higher management and I got a pamphlet explaining the rules and regulations, Oh great Monsieur le Clownshoes? That helps!! F***** morons!!!

Now people are suing the banks, and winning, soon legislation will probably force the banks to stop being ruthlessly vindictive towards their customers too.

My first bank charged me, which took me into the red so they charged me for that as well, eventually it built up to about 300 pounds, I refused to pay any of the charges,and informed them several times that if the charges were not dropped I would leave the bank,Eventually I took a day off work and went to see the Bank manager in person, there at least she wrote all but the original charge off, at least she had the power to overturn a decision made by a computer!! I still left the bank though, I will not be f***** around by moronic beureaucratic nonsense. And neither should anyone else. [rant mode off]

Criminy! Don't overdraft your account, problem solved.

Great so you have never gone overdrawn accidently!

FYI in my case I had a cheque go through much quicker than I thought and although my wage check was in it hadn't cleared. I had brought my overdraft facility down to 50 pounds but wanted to extend it over the Christmas period, to pay for sundry medical expenses, they said computer says no, because I had gone ovrdrawn and was considered a bad credit risk!! WTH I'd only once ever had credit in my life??? Needless to say I had to shell out 150 pounds anyway, my health is more important than money and that's how the whole criminally insane BS started.

 

[Godwynn]

Fight the Power!

 

[brennan]

The OP said that bank charges may be unlawful in the UK, can someone explain to me why that would be the case.

Banks have been charging £20-30 for 'administrative costs' when cheque's bounce or people go overdrawn, however legally they are only allowed to charge for actual costs incurred. A group of ex bankers and industry watchdogs recently convened to assess how much it could actually cost a bank to run the administration on these transactions and lo and behold they come up with a maximum of £4.50. If this goes through the courts, every bank in the UK will have been illegally overcharging people for decades.

 

[brennan]

Criminy! Don't overdraft your account, problem solved.

Sublime advice, I bet no-one thought of that before.

 

[bhsup]

Sidhe, checking accounts are not revolving credit accounts. If you kept all your money as cash on you, you wouldn't be able to overspend because once you ran out of bills, that would be it. That is how you must view checking accounts. Checks do not equal money. Oh, and yes I have been overdrawn twice before, both due to calculation errors on my part. I got whacked with (if I remember rightly) a $25.00 fee and went on with my life. Frankly, I think a good, high fee above administrative costs is a good idea. Makes people more keen on doing their books right and not getting overdrawn.

 

[bathsheba666]

The OP said that bank charges may be unlawful in the UK, can someone explain to me why that would be the case.

Not quite. It is punitive bank charges that are now deemed unreasonable.
The banks are loading the charges to people that, for examle, go overdrawn.
These customers are in effect subsidising other areas of the banks' operations.
Banks now can be required to demonstrate that these charges relate solely to the cost of the customer default.

 

[Sophie 378]

Good for Mr Purcell!

I went overdrawn once because I'd put up a notice on Amazon that I wanted to buy something, and was charged for the item the same day without being asked if I wanted to buy it or not.

I was going into town the same day and went to the bank to pay in some cash to make sure that when the item came, I could buy it online without going overdrawn, and found to my horror that my account had gone from about £50 to minus £30, as by buying the item I'd gone £0.27 overdrawn - yes, less than a dollar's worth - and they'd charged me £30!

I printed out my account summary and demanded to see the manager, and when I'd explained the circumstances, they decided to waive the fee - and gave me an instant refund.

 

[Sidhe]

Sidhe, checking accounts are not revolving credit accounts. If you kept all your money as cash on you, you wouldn't be able to overspend because once you ran out of bills, that would be it. That is how you must view checking accounts. Checks do not equal money. Oh, and yes I have been overdrawn twice before, both due to calculation errors on my part. I got whacked with (if I remember rightly) a $25.00 fee and went on with my life. Frankly, I think a good, high fee above administrative costs is a good idea. Makes people more keen on doing their books right and not getting overdrawn.

So you'd say the banks behaviour in my case was fair? And I should of payed 900 pounds in fees?

A current account can go overdrawn, a debit account can't. Mine was a current.

 

[Elrohir]

Stunned customers at his branch of RBS watched as debt collectors seized four computers, two fax machines and a till filled with cash.

The branch manager was told that the items would be sold unless RBS came up with the money owed to Mr Purcell.

I'll buy the tin full of cash! Bidding will start at $1!

 

[bhsup]

So you'd say the banks behaviour in my case was fair? And I should of payed 900 pounds in fees?

A current account can go overdrawn, a debit account can't. Mine was a current.

Before I potentially stick my foot in my mouth more than it may already be, I should probably backtrack since I am not familiar with "current accounts".

 

[Sidhe]

Before I potentially stick my foot in my mouth more than it may already be, I should probably backtrack since I am not familiar with "current accounts".

Their accounts that can have overdraft facilities, as I say I'd lowered mine but when I tried to raise it again the computer said no, since I had a spotless credit history which I showed them this was just pointless beaureaucracy and BS. Which ended up costing me 480 pounds. The reason given was because I had gone overdrawn by accident, in fact the money was technically in their it just hadn't cleared, most banks will look at what is coming in before they fine you, my bank not only fined me but because it did it charged me again, when I tried to extend the overdraft to stop the fine they said no, then 3 months later I ended up accruing 480 pounds in fines, do you think this is responsible and sensible interpritation of bvanks rules, or just the fact that although the bank mananger wanted to, he wasn't allowed to overrule the computer. Bear in mind here I was asking for a 50 pound extension, I had a wage coming in that was 20 times that, and I had consistently had that coming in for the last year. And his head office said no, and the complaints board at the bank agreed I was not entitled to make a copmplaint, and the decision was fair?

 

[ArneHD]

I'll buy the tin full of cash! Bidding will start at $1!

1£ actually.

Anyway, it's nice to see that the costumer can leverage himself over a bank, makes me feel as though I have power to resist banking.